On 30 Dec 2009, at 20:19, David Chelimsky wrote:
> What about something like:
>
> expected #<Class:2158174640> => Fixnum to be a kind of Fixnum
>
> That is more aligned with other failure messages. WDYT?
I like that. You have to read the current message _very_ carefully to see what
it's actually saying.
Thinking about it though, isn't the current format wrong anyway? "Fixnum is
the kind of 1" sounds (torturously) correct. For want of ability to say what I
mean in terms of types, here are examples instead:
Integer is a kind of Object*
Object.new is an (instance of) Object
Integer is a(n instance of) Class
Fixnum is a kind of Integer
1 is a(n instance of) Fixnum
Gets a bit harder with modules though:
[] is an (instance of) a Class that includes Enumerable
[] is Enumerable
(second one only works if the module name is an adjective)
* Actually, this satisfies both definitions, as Integer is an instance Class,
which is an Object...
And just out of curiosity, Roger, what's your use case? I can't remember ever
using be_a/be_an, at least not in any code that has survived.
Ashley
--
http://www.patchspace.co.uk/
http://www.linkedin.com/in/ashleymoran
_______________________________________________
rspec-users mailing list
rspec-users@rubyforge.org
http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users
