Re: Name Collision

Actually, I don't see a lot of value in having a base class just for the
purpose of having such kind of shortcuts to assertions and constraints. Are
you willing to keep it in the repo?

On Sun, Aug 31, 2008 at 10:46 PM, Charlie Poole <[email protected]
> wrote:

>  Hi Simone,
>
> I copied us back to the list. The list can be set up either way... it's a
> long-standing
> religious issue whether it shoud be done one way or the other.
>
> You may well be right about Assert. Alternatively, we could simply NOT
> provide
> an alias and let people keep using Assert.That, etc.
>
> Charlie
>
>  ------------------------------
> *From:* Simone Busoli [mailto:[email protected]]
> *Sent:* Sunday, August 31, 2008 1:13 PM
>
> *To:* Charlie Poole
> *Subject:* Re: [Nunit-users] Name Collision
>
>  Hmm, I keep replying you in private, it looks like sourceforge mls behave
> differently from others. With google groups replying to the mail sends the
> response to the group..
> Anyways, I think that using Expect might be misleading, I had to go look to
> make an idea of what it was for.. Since it actually asserts, I think the
> most straightforward name you can give it is Assert.
>
> On Sat, Aug 30, 2008 at 8:58 PM, Charlie Poole <
> [email protected]> wrote:
>
>>  Yeah, I thought of that. The only thing is that I used Expect to placate
>> folks who
>> dislike Assert. :-)
>>
>> Charlie
>>
>>  ------------------------------
>> *From:* Simone Busoli [mailto:[email protected]]
>> *Sent:* Saturday, August 30, 2008 5:14 AM
>> *To:* Charlie Poole
>> *Subject:* Re: [Nunit-users] Name Collision
>>
>>   Assert?
>>
>> On Fri, Aug 29, 2008 at 7:26 PM, Charlie Poole <
>> [email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>>  What would folks like to see as an alternative name?
>>>
>>>  ------------------------------
>>> *From:* [email protected] [mailto:
>>> [email protected]] *On Behalf Of *Craig A.
>>> Ritchie
>>> *Sent:* Friday, August 29, 2008 4:41 AM
>>> *To:* [email protected]
>>> *Subject:* [Nunit-users] Name Collision
>>>
>>>   Not sure if this has been discussed or reported as of yet but NUnit
>>> 2.5 Alpha 3 has a class called AssertionHelper class that has a method
>>> called Expect().  When inheriting from AssertionHelper in my test class and
>>> then using Rhino.Mocks within my test I get some naming collision with this
>>> Expect method as Rhino.Mocks has a static class named Expect.  I know there
>>> are simple ways around this but since more than likely these two testing
>>> tools are used together quite a bit NUnit 2.5 might want to address this in
>>> a future release if AssertionHelper is going to hang around.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> -Craig
>>>
>>>
>>> -------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> This SF.Net email is sponsored by the Moblin Your Move Developer's
>>> challenge
>>> Build the coolest Linux based applications with Moblin SDK & win great
>>> prizes
>>> Grand prize is a trip for two to an Open Source event anywhere in the
>>> world
>>> http://moblin-contest.org/redirect.php?banner_id=100&url=/
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Nunit-users mailing list
>>> [email protected]
>>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/nunit-users
>>>
>>>
>>
>

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.Net email is sponsored by the Moblin Your Move Developer's challenge
Build the coolest Linux based applications with Moblin SDK & win great prizes
Grand prize is a trip for two to an Open Source event anywhere in the world
http://moblin-contest.org/redirect.php?banner_id=100&url=/

_______________________________________________
Nunit-users mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/nunit-users