Closed patcon closed 10 years ago
Don't know much about the dependency but looking at how its implemented it seems like it could be achieved without it. I'm not opposed either way just thinking out loud. Also, don't know enough coffeescript to say that my feeling is actually possible.
@patcon thanks for the PR thought! really cool feature idea. I think we are moving towards this project getting much larger so I think it might be a good idea (i'll see if @sroberts or @technoskald agree) that we make it a requirement to include at least some sort of unit test in a PR.
Would you be comfortable taking a stab at one? Check out the spec/ folder for some examples.
I'm just now seeing the "no tests" comment at the top and feel dumb. I'm fine with this PR as is in that case @sroberts. We can iterate later and improve by adding tests or refactoring code. I'm all for just getting working code in the lib.
I am not sure we're ready to require unit tests yet anyway, since I have no idea how to do them...
@technoskald
Naa, not my level either. I do need to learn those. Maybe I'll have to con @mattjay to write a quick guide to building tests for this.
Anyway, I'm good to go on this PR, so I'm gonna merge!
:+1: good stuff. Thanks @patcon !!
haha thanks gents. I'll get better. I promise. INSPIRING ANIMAL IMAGERY!
No tests as I haven't worked through hubot script testing yet, but I'll give it a shot later