From: "ara.t.howard" <ara.t.howard@...>
Date: 2009-03-29T13:30:48+09:00
Subject: Re: [ANN] testy.rb - ruby testing that's mad at the world


On Mar 28, 2009, at 6:00 PM, Phlip wrote:

> ara.t.howard wrote:
>
>>   . it.should.not.merely.be.a.unit.testing.with.a.clever.dsl
>
> How about you simply let the programmer write anything they want,  
> and then if it returns false or nil you rip their entire expression  
> and report the name and value of every variable within it?
>
>  assert{ foo > 41.8 and foo < 42.1 } => false
>
>     foo => 40.9
>
> Notice we didn't need to tell the assertion the variable's name was  
> 'foo'. This rewards programmers for writing readable code. You get  
> the maximum reflection for the leanest statements.
>
> Honestly I think it's _lack_ of a nauseatingly kewt DSL that  
> inhibits adoption of assert{ 2.0 }...
>

that's interesting indeed.  one of my goals with testy is that output  
is meaningful both for computers and humans and, for that, yaml is tops.

still - reporting on the context the errors was thown raised from is  
quite interesting.  you are basically saying report binding not  
stacktrace right?


a @ http://codeforpeople.com/
--
we can deny everything, except that we have the possibility of being  
better. simply reflect on that.
h.h. the 14th dalai lama