Rename be_true and be_false to be_truthy and be_falsey. #284

Merged
merged 7 commits into from Jul 22, 2013

Conversation

Projects
None yet
5 participants
@samphippen
Member

samphippen commented Jul 7, 2013

See: #283.

Rename be_true and be_false to be_truthy and be_falsey.
Signed-off-by: Sam Phippen <samphippen@googlemail.com>
@cupakromer

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@cupakromer

cupakromer Jul 7, 2013

Member

Do we want to deprecate be_true and be_false first while adding be_truthy and be_falsey as aliases?

Member

cupakromer commented Jul 7, 2013

Do we want to deprecate be_true and be_false first while adding be_truthy and be_falsey as aliases?

@samphippen

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@samphippen

samphippen Jul 7, 2013

Member

Yes. I'll do that in 2-99 if this gets approval 💣

Member

samphippen commented Jul 7, 2013

Yes. I'll do that in 2-99 if this gets approval 💣

@alindeman

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@alindeman

alindeman Jul 7, 2013

Contributor

I thought be_true and be_false were staying, but now mean == true and == false.

Contributor

alindeman commented Jul 7, 2013

I thought be_true and be_false were staying, but now mean == true and == false.

@samphippen

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@samphippen

samphippen Jul 7, 2013

Member

@alindeman #283 calls for deprecation then removal, @myronmarston also pointed out that one can do be true and be false to get that behaviour.

Member

samphippen commented Jul 7, 2013

@alindeman #283 calls for deprecation then removal, @myronmarston also pointed out that one can do be true and be false to get that behaviour.

@alindeman

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@alindeman

alindeman Jul 7, 2013

Contributor

Perfect, that makes sense.

Contributor

alindeman commented Jul 7, 2013

Perfect, that makes sense.

@samphippen

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@samphippen

samphippen Jul 10, 2013

Member

@alindeman can you take a look at the 2-99 pull and then tell me if you think this is good for mergification?

Member

samphippen commented Jul 10, 2013

@alindeman can you take a look at the 2-99 pull and then tell me if you think this is good for mergification?

@alindeman

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@alindeman

alindeman Jul 14, 2013

Contributor

We discussed an alias for be_falsy. I don't see that in this pull yet.

Contributor

alindeman commented Jul 14, 2013

We discussed an alias for be_falsy. I don't see that in this pull yet.

samphippen added some commits Jul 21, 2013

Alias be_falsy to be_falsey.
Signed-off-by: Sam Phippen <samphippen@googlemail.com>
@samphippen

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@samphippen

samphippen Jul 21, 2013

Member

@alindeman and fixed.

Member

samphippen commented Jul 21, 2013

@alindeman and fixed.

@samphippen

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@samphippen

samphippen Jul 21, 2013

Member

Also about to update the 2.99 pull.

Member

samphippen commented Jul 21, 2013

Also about to update the 2.99 pull.

@samphippen

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@samphippen

samphippen Jul 21, 2013

Member

@JonRowe @soulcutter @alindeman @myronmarston if one you see a reason not to merge this and the equivalent pull for 2-99 (#285) before I get up tomorrow, I'll fix it. Otherwise I'll merge tomorrow morning.

Member

samphippen commented Jul 21, 2013

@JonRowe @soulcutter @alindeman @myronmarston if one you see a reason not to merge this and the equivalent pull for 2-99 (#285) before I get up tomorrow, I'll fix it. Otherwise I'll merge tomorrow morning.

@coveralls

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@coveralls

coveralls Jul 21, 2013

Coverage Status

Coverage increased (+0%) when pulling 4e4ef45 on samphippen:change-be-true-false-to-truthy-falsey into feeb27d on rspec:master.

Coverage Status

Coverage increased (+0%) when pulling 4e4ef45 on samphippen:change-be-true-false-to-truthy-falsey into feeb27d on rspec:master.

samphippen added a commit that referenced this pull request Jul 22, 2013

Merge pull request #284 from samphippen/change-be-true-false-to-truth…
…y-falsey

Rename be_true and be_false to be_truthy and be_falsey.

@samphippen samphippen merged commit 42d0bb8 into rspec:master Jul 22, 2013

1 check passed

default The Travis CI build passed
Details
@JonRowe

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@JonRowe

JonRowe Jul 22, 2013

Member

Hey so obviously this broke the rest of rspec's test suites, but there's also a side effect be_true is still a valid rspec statement (it now goes to the be_* matcher to assert on true?) are we ok with this?

Member

JonRowe commented Jul 22, 2013

Hey so obviously this broke the rest of rspec's test suites, but there's also a side effect be_true is still a valid rspec statement (it now goes to the be_* matcher to assert on true?) are we ok with this?

@samphippen

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@samphippen

samphippen Jul 22, 2013

Member

@JonRowe true? and false? can be defined by users, but they aren't defined on Object so I don't think this is a problem.

Member

samphippen commented Jul 22, 2013

@JonRowe true? and false? can be defined by users, but they aren't defined on Object so I don't think this is a problem.

@JonRowe

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@JonRowe

JonRowe Jul 22, 2013

Member

@samphippen my concern was more that given be_true and be_false have previously had specific meaning that it might be confusing for users

Member

JonRowe commented Jul 22, 2013

@samphippen my concern was more that given be_true and be_false have previously had specific meaning that it might be confusing for users

@yujinakayama yujinakayama referenced this pull request in yujinakayama/transpec Sep 30, 2013

Closed

Support conversion to `be_truthy` / `be_falsey` #8

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