>gooder
he he
-
Cheers,
Sean
--
Sent from: http://forum.world.st/Pharo-Smalltalk-Users-f1310670.html
On Thu, 11 Oct 2018 at 21:52, Sean P. DeNigris
wrote:
> Pharo Smalltalk Users mailing list wrote
> > Still I think TestAsserter is not the most intuitive name. Asserter is
> not
> > even an English word if I am not mistaken.
>
The good (and bad) thing about English (since contributes to its
Pharo Smalltalk Users mailing list wrote
> Still I think TestAsserter is not the most intuitive name. Asserter is not
> even an English word if I am not mistaken.
It came up in a few dictionaries in a google search, but clearly not the
most common. My understanding is that [Verb]-er names are
--- Begin Message ---
Hi James,
Thanks a lot for this very interesting historical perspective :)
Still I think TestAsserter is not the most intuitive name. Asserter is not even
an English word if I am not mistaken.
Thanks again
Abdelghani
> On 10 Oct 2018, at 1:57 pm, James Foster wrote:
>
>
Hi Abdelghani,
I don’t have immediate access to earlier versions of SUnit (oh, that it were on
GitHub!), but my recollection is that TestCase was originally a root class but
duplicate code with TestResource inspired a refactoring that called for a
common superclass. The name TestAsserter was
I am neither an expert nor do I know what the reasoning behind the
naming initially was. But my initial thought about your question was
that a single method named tesXXX is actually a test, and the class
containing all these tests is intended to check the assertions that are
formulated in the
--- Begin Message ---
Hi,
I am trying to understand how classes in smalltalk projects are named.
Something I can hardly understand is why the root class of the Test hierarchy
is named TestAsserter?
What is the intention behind the term Asserter?
Wouldn’t it be more appropriate to name it
