[Windmill-dev] Negating assertions?

[Adam Christian]

assertNots are now working and checked into the trunk, for every new  
assertion that is added, an assertNot is dynamically created. I think  
it makes sense to stick with the naming convention we already have and  
stay compatible with the jsUnit tests.

Adam

On Dec 19, 2007, at 10:58 PM, Matthew Eernisse wrote:

> Mikeal Rogers wrote:
>> It may be worth doing the notAssertNode ( or is it assertNotNode? )  
>> to have some kind of parity with jsunit, which we do support in the  
>> JavaScript framework.
>
> That's right, we do already have:
>
> assertNotEquals
> assertNotNull
> assertNotUndefined
> assertNotNaN
>
> in the JSUnit-compatible asserts.
>
> So I'd favor following that convention -- it also makes logical  
> sense: you're still asserting something, just asserting that  
> something is *not* the case.
>
>
> Matthew
>
> _______________________________________________
> Windmill-dev mailing list
> Windmill-dev at osafoundation.org
> http://lists.osafoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/windmill-dev