Lorin wrote:

> > When I used it (it might be better now) it required you to make a class to
> > do all your testing, rather than just adding static methods, which was a
> > rather unnecessary step.
> 
> No, you still create TestCase classes.  It's hard to see how you have a
> test framework in Java that actually called methods inside your classes.
> Unless you decided to make every class implement 'Testable'.

You could have test methods be all the private static methods which start
with 'test'. I dunno if scanning for those is one of the things prevented
by the inane 'security' features of that language though.

A note to anyone considering creating a language: not allowing
free-floating functions is just dumb. It isn't 'pure', it's just dumb.

-Bram


_______________________________________________
Bits mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.sugoi.org/mailman/listinfo/bits

Reply via email to