Personally I think that SUnit needs love.
 - The API is clearly not clear (just see: the command line handler,
smalltalk ci, calypso and the test runner tool use different APIs that are
not equivalent and do not go through the same hooks)
 - The existing hooks are not enough and not well documented, other than
overriding #runCase:, how can we define parameterizable tests for example?

With Julien (in cc) we were thinking some improvements on this front. He
has a new UI for the test runner that is cleaner and will allow having
different backends (which will mean also that we will need to clarify the
API).

I think in Pharo7 there have been some improvements in the assertions front?

On Thu, Aug 9, 2018 at 3:07 PM Tim Mackinnon <[email protected]> wrote:

> I’m trying to write more exercism tests and I’m baffled why there isn’t
> the inverse equivalent of #assert:equals: which shows a useful test
> response where you can easily see what’s going on.
>
> #assert:equals: is very nice, showing you a diff browser - I kind of
> expect the opposite to be there, but it all looks like a bit of mess with
> assert vs should and deny vs shouldn’t -did we change tact somewhere over
> the years and not deprecate stuff?
>
> Tim
>


-- 



Guille Polito

Research Engineer

Centre de Recherche en Informatique, Signal et Automatique de Lille

CRIStAL - UMR 9189

French National Center for Scientific Research - *http://www.cnrs.fr
<http://www.cnrs.fr>*


*Web:* *http://guillep.github.io* <http://guillep.github.io>

*Phone: *+33 06 52 70 66 13

Reply via email to