So, is clarity when executing vs clarity when reading (because "a=b" is a lot clearer that "a equals: b"). Is that? Don't get me wrong... I'm not struggling against it, I'm just trying to understand the issue.
Esteban On Jun 22, 2012, at 2:56 PM, Sean P. DeNigris wrote: > > Camillo Bruni-3 wrote >> >> I hate to go and re-eavluate the code to see what was wrong during >> comparison... >> ...self assert: self someExpressionReturningFalse = self >> someExpressionReturningTrue >> how the heck do you know what went wrong? >> > Yes, that's exactly it! > > > Camillo Bruni-3 wrote >> >> I don't like it particularly, it feels too java-ish, I prefer much more >> the "shoulder" >> framework written in bern. >> self someExpressionReturningFalse should = self >> someExpressionReturningTrue >> > +1! > > Re the framework, do you mean Phexample? I *really* like the matchers, like > the one you mentioned above. Although I don't like the way tests build on > each other. It's a great idea, but a failing given should cause the test to > be skipped, which we don't have in Pharo (the best we can do is probably > have it be an error, which is better than a failing test, but not by much) > > -- > View this message in context: > http://forum.world.st/assert-equals-tp4636050p4636136.html > Sent from the Pharo Smalltalk mailing list archive at Nabble.com. >
