Closed dparis closed 8 years ago
Aw snap; I'm a little disappointed we didn't think of this in the first place, because now it's technically a breaking change.
On the other hand, it's only breaking for users who are using checking
AND using multiple clauses in their for-all
, which is probably almost nobody. And even if they are using it, their code should still work, it will just be using bind
instead of tuple
and therefore just not shrink quite as well.
Hey @lackita there's not any other reason this would be a bad idea is there?
I think it's probably fine, wish I had thought of that in the first place.
Cool; thanks @dparis for the PR.
Released this as 0.2.1
.
@gfredericks You're welcome! Glad it worked out, and thank you for cutting a new release so quickly.
Update the
checking
andfor-all
macros in thetest.chuck.clojure-test
namespace to use thetest.chuck.properties/for-all
function instead oftest.check.properties/for-all
.Since the
test.chuck.properties/for-all
method is intended (AFAIK) to be a drop-in replacement for the vanillafor-all
, I don't see any harm in doing this, and then theclojure-test
functions can use all of the nice augmented functionality.The test suite ran cleanly before and after this change, and some local testing of the new SNAPSHOT version allowed my app to correctly define a test using the enhanced
for-all
behavior inchecking
.