So, what we should use? 'not_to' or 'to_not'? On Tuesday, 14 September 2010 04:13:45 UTC+2, [email protected] wrote: > > On Sep 7, 2010, at 10:35 PM, Takumi Tsunokake wrote: > > > Hi, I'm Takumi Tsunokake. > > > > I think > > expect { ... }.not_to rails_error > > is more grammatical and natural than > > expect { ... }.to_not rails_error > > I think you mean raise_error (I've made the same mistake a few times). I'm > pretty sure they're equally valid, grammatically speaking: > > Expect x not to y > Expect x to not y > > > Are there any backgrounds and reasons of decision for expect > > { ... }.to_not, not expect { ... }.not_to? > > > > I'm happy if expect { ... }.to_not is changed to expect > > { ... }.not_to. > > It's because it aligns better with should[_not]. I think it would be more > confusing if we had [not_]to and [should_]not. > > HTH, > David > _______________________________________________ > rspec-users mailing list > [email protected] <javascript:> > http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users > >
-- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "rspec" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/rspec/fc265d4f-e561-4a7f-bc8a-c24eb5b92f80%40googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
