Closed matteo-daddio closed 9 months ago
You said that the PR is intended to "Improved documentation", but I don't see the documentation change anywhere. Did you forget to commit some changes?
It would be nice to write tests to make sure that the message contains the added information. Probably here. If you don't want to do that, I can merge the PR now and work on the test as a separate change, too.
But this overall looks good. Thanks!
Improved documentation and error messages of check-=
and check-within
as discussed in issue https://github.com/racket/rackunit/issues/165.
There are more changes I'd like to make, but they are just nits, so I'll go ahead and merge this, and make the change later. In particular, I'd like to keep similarity between "For example, the following checks pass:" and "And the following checks fail:" as much as possible, so that readers can contrast them easily. That means:
check-within
for hash
should have (hash 'C 25 'F 77)
as the expected value. check-within
for list
should have the same expected value.Thank you very much sorawee!
Matteo d’Addio
Da: sorawee @.> Inviato: Saturday, November 4, 2023 3:23:04 PM A: racket/rackunit @.> Cc: matteo-daddio @.>; Author @.> Oggetto: Re: [racket/rackunit] Improved cheeck-= and check-within error messages (PR #166)
Merged #166https://github.com/racket/rackunit/pull/166 into master.
— Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHubhttps://github.com/racket/rackunit/pull/166#event-10862921239, or unsubscribehttps://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AZ2CGPIQIJSHOGYI6EPLS2TYCZFURAVCNFSM6AAAAAA62WUQ2CVHI2DSMVQWIX3LMV45UABCJFZXG5LFIV3GK3TUJZXXI2LGNFRWC5DJN5XDWMJQHA3DEOJSGEZDGOI. You are receiving this because you authored the thread.Message ID: @.***>
Improved documentation and error messages of
check-=
andcheck-within
as discussed in issue #165.