Newsgroups: php.internals Path: news.php.net Xref: news.php.net php.internals:69698 Return-Path: Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 38647 invoked from network); 19 Oct 2013 07:41:47 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO lists.php.net) (127.0.0.1) by localhost with SMTP; 19 Oct 2013 07:41:47 -0000 X-Host-Fingerprint: 80.4.21.210 cpc22-asfd3-2-0-cust209.1-2.cable.virginmedia.com Received: from [80.4.21.210] ([80.4.21.210:19445] helo=localhost.localdomain) by pb1.pair.com (ecelerity 2.1.1.9-wez r(12769M)) with ESMTP id E3/C3-23638-AB732625 for ; Sat, 19 Oct 2013 03:41:46 -0400 To: internals@lists.php.net,Andrea Faulds Message-ID: <526237B6.8080202@php.net> Date: Sat, 19 Oct 2013 08:41:42 +0100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130625 Thunderbird/17.0.7 MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <3D.BC.23638.84CA1625@pb1.pair.com> <5261CFAD.90300@ajf.me> In-Reply-To: <5261CFAD.90300@ajf.me> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Posted-By: 80.4.21.210 Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] RFC: Expectations From: krakjoe@php.net (Joe Watkins) On 10/19/2013 01:17 AM, Andrea Faulds wrote: > On 18/10/2013 22:46, Joe Watkins wrote: >> Evening Chaps, >> >> Following on from discussion regarding assertion API in PHP, the >> following RFC is now up for discussion: >> >> https://wiki.php.net/rfc/expectations >> >> Please do point out any missing sections or information, so that it >> can be clarified as quickly as possible. >> >> I hope this conveys the idea a bit clearer to everyone ? >> >> Cheers >> Joe >> > > I like it, but I'd rather we just called them what they are and use > AssertionException, because expect is really just a new assert > statement, with a different name to avoid conflicting with assert() for > backwards-compatibility :) > > Otherwise, I have no objections. > > Thanks. I thought about it ... For the sake of making the concept as simple as possible to convey in documentation, it is probably better to have a uniform name: Expect throwing ExpectationException is intuitive to some degree, Expect throwing an AssertionException seems less so ... Cheers Joe