On 2018-05-08 09:07, Nick Sabalausky (Abscissa) wrote:
The question is: Why "should.equal" instead of "shouldEqual"? The dot only seems there to be cute.
It scales better. This way only one "should" function is needed and one "not" function. Otherwise there would be a lot of duplication, i.e. "shouldEqual" and "shouldNotEqual". Hopefully the library can have a one generic implementation of "not", where it doesn't if the assertion is "equal", "be" or some other assertion.
-- /Jacob Carlborg
