On Tue, Feb 14, 2012 at 1:50 PM, John J Barton <[email protected]>wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 14, 2012 at 10:45 AM, Rick Waldron <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > > > > On Tue, Feb 14, 2012 at 1:51 AM, David Herman <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> > >> On Feb 13, 2012, at 4:03 PM, Rick Waldron wrote: > >> > >> > I speak for myself and my colleagues when I say that we've had our > fill > >> > of including scripts _just_ for the sake of having a common testing > >> > interface. > >> > >> A reasonable point. OTOH, I wouldn't want to over-engineer. And the > larger > >> the API, the harder it will be to standardize. I'm thinking maybe just a > >> couple bare-bones primitives: > >> > >> 1. AssertionError <: Error > >> 2. assert(x === 12); // throws an AssertionError with a default error > >> message > >> 3. assert(x === 12, "twelve, supposedly") // throws an AssertionError > with > >> the given error message > > > > > > Bingo :) > +1 I assume nothing stops us from subtyping AssertionError either, right? > Is this significantly better than console.assert()? > Dave's assert throws an AssertionError (a new global, presumably?). But more importantly, it *actually throws*, which is an important departure from console.assert.
_______________________________________________ es-discuss mailing list [email protected] https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
