On Wed, Dec 23, 2009 at 5:03 PM, Mark Derricutt wrote:
> 'lo,
>
> I was reading http://blog.fogus.me/2009/12/21/clojures-pre-and-post/
> on the new pre and post conditions and seeing that they throw
> java.lang.Exception kinda struck me as a bad smell, esp. when
> integrating with other systems wr
On Dec 24, 7:08 am, Mike Douglas wrote:
> Previously:
> "Caused by: java.lang.Exception: Assert failed: (= % x)"
With your patch, assert does not include x in its message anymore in
case s is not given. Also, as a non-native speaker I find the phrase
"failed when" somewhat strange to my ears. Asi
Hi,
I've written a related patch that makes three changes:
1. assert now raises AssertionError, instead of Exception.
2. assert is now overloaded with a second parameter that replaces
"Assert failed" in the original message.
3. the (pre- or post-) condition that raised the exception, along with
t
It would be nice if the exception string stated if it was a pre or
post condition failure at the very least.
On Dec 23, 5:03 pm, Mark Derricutt wrote:
> 'lo,
>
> I was readinghttp://blog.fogus.me/2009/12/21/clojures-pre-and-post/
> on the new pre and post conditions and seeing that they throw
> j
'lo,
I was reading http://blog.fogus.me/2009/12/21/clojures-pre-and-post/
on the new pre and post conditions and seeing that they throw
java.lang.Exception kinda struck me as a bad smell, esp. when
integrating with other systems written in Java or another language.
Forcing upstream clients to catc
