Depends on the context.
--jason
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:jboss-
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of danch
> Sent: Tuesday, July 30, 2002 7:46 AM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: [JBoss-dev] Truth of statements in assertTrue cla
b (and should have been).
>
> --jason
>
>
>
>>-Original Message-
>>From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:jboss-
>>[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of David Jencks
>>Sent: Monday, July 29, 2002 3:41 PM
>>To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>Subject: Re: [JBoss-dev] Truth
] On Behalf Of David Jencks
> Sent: Monday, July 29, 2002 3:41 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: [JBoss-dev] Truth of statements in assertTrue clauses
>
> I've been using the explanation of failure style, I hadn't really
> considered the other. I would like to swi
CTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Monday, July 29, 2002 3:40 PM
Subject: Re: [JBoss-dev] Truth of statements in assertTrue clauses
> I've been using the explanation of failure style, I hadn't really
> considered the other. I would like to switch. I've found writing t
I've been using the explanation of failure style, I hadn't really
considered the other. I would like to switch. I've found writing the
explanation of failure messages exceedingly confusing.
david jencks
On 2002.07.29 12:07:59 -0400 Scott M Stark wrote:
> In the assertTrue(String message, boole
In the assertTrue(String message, boolean condition) form of the
junit assertion some people are using a message that reflects the
expected truth of the condition while others are using a message
that reflects why the AssertionFailedError is thrown. We need to
be consistent on this usage. I happen
