On Thu, 24 Oct 2013, Philippe Marschall wrote:
On 22.10.13 00:08, Camillo Bruni wrote:
see my long explanation here
https://pharo.fogbugz.com/default.asp?11876#87218
it looks unsuspicous until the moment you try understand such a failing
assertion.
This isn't moving Pharo foward. This doesn't make the system any more
flexible, adaptable, modular or malleable. This doesn't make the system any
easier to maintain. This doesn't make the system any smaller, faster,
scalable or secure. This doesn't make the system any easier to maintain. This
doesn't make life easier for anybody developing Pharo or using Pharo. This
doesn't improve Pharo in any way.
This only adds code who's sole purpose is to break people's existing code.
<rant>
It's part of the Pharo manifesto: "Not backward compatible"
</rant>
Levente
If you disagree with such a way of writing tests then the right solution IMHO
is to write a SLint rule.
Cheers
Philippe
