Henrik Johansen wrote: > Why not rename Object>>assert: to should:, so it avoids breaking > polymorphism, and keep TestCase>>assert: reserved for a boolean argument > to stay compatible with SUnit in other dialects? > > On the negative side, it might not be as intuitive using should: for > pre/post-assertions, as well as inconvenient to remember the difference > between assert: and should: in TestCases. Not big enough negatives to > outweigh the benefits though, imo. >
Henry, Sorry, I hadn't read this mail before making a proposal. I agree that renaming Object>>assert: to #should: would be an improvement. But I still think it's probably better to remove it altogether and send #assert to a block. It may just be me, but I've always felt that as a selector 'should' doesn't really communicate the intent as well as 'assert'. Regards, -Martin _______________________________________________ Pharo-project mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project
