result.shouldEqual(expected);
..
Now, the key thing is that I'd like to have an extension on any object
be it string, Integer or regular object to internally call one of the
QUnit methods (in this case equal(result, expected);
I have been playing with something like: Object.prototype.shouldEqual
..
That's actually exactly how it works. Maybe the missing link is how you
call/define `equal`?
I thought it was considered bad style to extend Object.prototype,
as that is shared by every other script/library in scope? In ES3,
new properties even leak into enumerations (for (var i in x) ..).
Why not define a wrapper function instead, that delegates to your
testing methods? You'd write:
$(result).shouldEqual(expected);
where the function '$' would return a wrapper object that
implements 'shouldEqual', knows about the wrapped object,
and delegates to 'equal'. Something like:
function equal(a,b) { return a+' equals '+b;}
function $(obj) {
return { shouldEqual: function(other) {
return equal(obj,other);
}
};
}
function log(msg) {
if (typeof console!='undefined')
console.log(msg);
else if (typeof WScript!='undefined')
WScript.StdOut.WriteLine(msg);
}
log( $(1).shouldEqual("1") ); // not really
Claus
--
To view archived discussions from the original JSMentors Mailman list:
http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/
To search via a non-Google archive, visit here:
http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
[email protected]
