-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 32
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
New name for assert_lits_equal ? #25
Comments
Funny enough, when I think of two lists as "equal," I always think of the contents and not the order, which is why I think this bug comes up so often in so many tests for folks. I (and I think many others) think of That said, I can totally see how this name might be confusing to many others, though, even though it makes sense to me, so I'm happy to explore a name change here. How about |
I share the same thoughts as you @devonestes .
This way you could keep the name as it is, and for devs it's cleaner what the default behaviour is |
Would |
equal
implies full equality aka==
which seems confusing (and was pointed out as a downside to introducing assertions into our code base).Not sure what the best name for this is, I introduced a small wrapper called
assert_lists_contain_same
for now - it's probably not the best for now happy for other variants but I wonder ig this would be a change considered for the library itself?Wrapper for reference, yes it's just a module for now not a macro:
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: