On Mon, Feb 7, 2011 at 2:30 AM, Jonathan M Davis <[email protected]>wrote:
> There are a number of people who have responded positively to my unit test > functions - including assertPred - as it has moved through the review > process. > Please reiterate that positive vote here (or negative if you're so > inclined). > The deadline for votes is today. > > As it stands, I believe that assertThrown, assertNotThrown, and > collectExceptionMsg will clearly pass the vote, but it's not so clear if > the > vote is in favor of assertPred. Going off just the votes in this thread, I > believe that it would be a tie as to whether assertPred made it in or not. > But > if we took the votes for the group of functions as a whole from previous > posts, > I believe that it would get in. It would be better though if such votes > were > confirmed here - especially if the vote is close. I'd prefer not to have an > ambiguous vote. > > So, please vote. > > I realize I'm not much of an active community member, but I would vote yes to all. I agree with you that assertPred does more than assert by itself could ever reasonably do, and I don't find it difficult to understand (at least, no more difficult than the "a < b" binaryFun syntax).
