[Rspec-users] 1 should be 2. huh?
dchelimsky at gmail.com
Tue Oct 24 09:47:29 EDT 2006
Can you please submit an RFE on this one?
On 10/24/06, Micah Martin <micah at 8thlight.com> wrote:
> There's another quirk I wanted to bring up. It's about the failure message
> with should_equal and should_be.
> x.should_equal 2
> a.should_not_be nil
> When they fail they yield messages like:
> 1 should equal 2
> nil should not be nil
> When I'm caught off guard, which can be often, these messages confuse me. 1
> should equal 2? No it shouldn't. nil should not be nil? But they are the
> You get my drift? When taken out side the context of a specification, these
> statements are just absurd.
> In my humble opinion, these messages should include their context and read
> like this:
> x should equal 2 but was 1
> a should not be nil but was nil
> I realize there might be an issue printing the expression that gets
> evaluated, but you guys have done some cool magic to this point. Have you
> got a bit more up your sleeves?
> Micah Martin
> 8th Light, Inc.
> Rspec-users mailing list
> Rspec-users at rubyforge.org
More information about the Rspec-users