On 2013-07-09, at 21:23, Frank Shearar <[email protected]> wrote:
> On 9 July 2013 19:45, Camillo Bruni <[email protected]> wrote: >> I continue my rant with should:raise:description: >> >> a) self should: [ Error signal: 'error message' ] raise: Halt description: >> 'message'. >> b) self should: [ 1 + 2 ] raise: Halt description: >> 'message'. >> >> In the first case you do not get the 'message' but 'error message'. >> In the second case you get the 'message'. >> >> Does the description make sense in this case? >> 1. if you signal Halt everything is fine >> 2. Every other case is a failure >> 3. In case a) an internal failure happens so the test fails anyway, fine, >> but no description >> 4. A strange? case where the tests actually DO pass but we nevertheless want >> to print a description. >> >> Can anybody give me a convincing case for 4? >> >> Sorry, after this I will stop :D > > In case (a) I would actually expect to see something like: "message. > Unexpected Error raised: 'error message'". > > In case (b) I'd want to see "message: no Halt raised" > > I can't think of why you would want a description for a success case, > so #4 just seems weird! exactly! :) I agree on that ;). Now the question is on how to properly fix this for debugging. Since you actually want to debug on the unexpected Exception in case a)... I'll check my magic box..
