On 19/01/2008, at 17:36 , David Chelimsky wrote: > When you say 5 == 3, what that is really saying is 5.==(3), which is > how we're able to support 5.should == 3 (becomes 5.should.==(3)).
Would it be true to say that the reason "5.should != 3" won't work is that somewhere inside Ruby the x != y comparison is remapped to !(x == y), and thus the "5.should != 3" is remapped to "not (5.should.== 3)", with rspec generating a failure when "should" sees false coming back from the "==" method? Or am I barking up the wrong tree and potentially misleading dozens of programmers down the garden path? Alex _______________________________________________ rspec-users mailing list rspec-users@rubyforge.org http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users
