On Jul 31, 2004, at 9:46 AM, Stas Bekman wrote:
to me, got and have are exactly the same thing. How are you going to remember which one to use when?
Yes, I will. :-)
Authors of the existing tests don't have to change anything, have_foo will work just the same, but won't add the skip reason anymore. This won't make affect the existing tests in any way, rather than not printing the reason for a tests being skipped.
Isn't that rather significant?
But, yes, the transition could be made 100% perfect, by keeping have_ as it is, and adding a new interface which doesn't add the skip reason. But we need to find an unambiguous name for it. skip_foo will be good, but we have a general function have(), which can't be replaced with skip(). So may be want_foo() is a better choice. Or may be you have a better name...
I thought I did. Hrm...
or may be add must_have_*, so have_* is for checking, and must_have_* is checking and requiring. may be it's too long to type, but I like it.
That's similar to have in the same way got is. Are you going to remember which is which?
I guess losing the skip message by making need_ functions that replace the existing have_ functions is okay. It's most important that tests continue to pass...
Regards,
David
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
