> > BTW, tAssert provides convenience functions that my script don't (yet?). > > At first, I wondered if both plugins should be merged.
> This is also the reason why I'd rather prefer to > strip down my tassert plugin and to leave only the TAssert command and > some utility functions in it. Just in case somebody cares (however unlikely that may be), I now removed the UT related stuff from tassert and created a spec plugin that allows to write script specifications that could look like this: http://github.com/tomtom/vimtlib/blob/83976d6b1572000b9950241749371206f7e03d59/spec/spec/spec.vim http://github.com/tomtom/vimtlib/blob/83976d6b1572000b9950241749371206f7e03d59/spec/spec/should.vim Other than Luc's UT, spec scripts are normal vim scripts (they are not pre-processed) but they have to be run by the :Spec command. I don't know yet which approach is better but I plan to integrate the should functions with his UT since I personally prefer the more descriptive messages when something goes wrong. There is also a function that runs a command and then compares the buffer contents with a file (with the option to ignore changes in whitespace). Regards, Thomas. --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message from the "vim_dev" maillist. For more information, visit http://www.vim.org/maillist.php -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
