search

EastAgile / robber.py

BDD / TDD assertion library for Python
MIT License
8 stars 1 forks source link

Shouldn't need to call matcher() when there is no argument for it #17

Closed tklarryonline closed 7 years ago

tklarryonline commented 7 years ago

Description

I don't feel like doing this:

expect(something).to.be.true()
expect(something).to.be.falsy()
expect(something).to.be.empty()

The function call () is purely redundant.

Proposed solution

Let's remove the need to call the function. Make it beautiful like this:

expect(something).to.be.true
expect(something).to.be.falsy
expect(something).to.be.empty
squallcs12 commented 7 years ago 
expect(something).to.be.true

will be marked as warning of statement seems to have no effect in pycharm

tklarryonline commented 7 years ago

We could ignore that warning, no?

hieueastagile commented 7 years ago

Actually, it's just the pyCharm warnings and there's no harm, I think, sure do the same thing. So if there's no further discussion, it would be chosen to be implemented later, is it ok @tklarryonline @squallcs12?

tklarryonline commented 7 years ago

I'm okay with it since I'm the one who raised this issue 😛

hieueastagile commented 7 years ago

It's not possible since we can't make property and method to be the same name. So please help closing this issue if you are around @oyster @tklarryonline