Refactor notEq, notSame and notInArray assertion messages #259
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Contributor
|
I think this is a very minor BC as I don't imagine many people code against the message. I think tagging this as 3.1.0 rather than 3.0.2 is good enough. The functionality hasn't changed, nor has any interface. It is a correction that some may see as inconsistent with a previous release, but does not warrant a major upgrade. What do you think? |
Contributor
Author
|
@rquadling I agree, if you're coding against arbitrary strings then you should be wary of things breaking anyway. 👍 |
Contributor
|
And we do have unique exception codes. |
Contributor
|
Thank you. |
Contributor
Author
|
@rquadling Thank you 👍 |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
2 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Context
Fixes #258
I figured this would be the best way to formulate the message (judging by other examples in your library).
However, I also noticed the constraints put into the exceptions are now still done with the key
expected. I would change this (not sure to what), but that could have impact because it's technically a BC break.What do you think?