Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Move start/stop to assert #600

Closed
jzaefferer opened this issue Jun 24, 2014 · 6 comments
Closed

Move start/stop to assert #600

jzaefferer opened this issue Jun 24, 2014 · 6 comments

Comments

@jzaefferer
Copy link
Member

As a follow-up to #374 and #588, we want to move the stop and start methods to the assert object. As before, this needs to be backwards compatible, so the existing methods need to stay for now.

@leobalter
Copy link
Member

@Krinkle, looks like with this follow-up issue we can close #374 or there are more things we should address?

@jzaefferer
Copy link
Member Author

#374 is already closed.

@JamesMGreene
Copy link
Member

I thought we were going with a new API, e.g. var done = assert.async(); /* ...do work... */ done();

Is moving start and stop to the assert context just necessary for the proper completion of #374, or is that the API we're going to continue using in v2.0 as well?

@leobalter
Copy link
Member

done = assert.async(); implementation is way better, and we can change this issue to target it.

Anyway, it's too complex to move start and stop to the assert and make it object independent.

@Krinkle
Copy link
Member

Krinkle commented Jun 29, 2014

Yeah, I'd support closing this issue in favour of #534.

It'd be nice for the start/stop system to not make it to the v2.0 era (maybe as a deprecated back-compat layer, but it's replacement should be in there).

@Krinkle Krinkle added the api label Jul 26, 2014
@jzaefferer
Copy link
Member Author

Agreed, stop/start as is should be available for migration, to be replaced by #534. An intermediate step of moving to assert doesn't make sense.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Development

No branches or pull requests

4 participants