[Rspec-devel] should_be_nil or should.be.nil

[Cuong Tran]

Both read the same to me.  That's why I went with ease of typing :-)

On 6/6/06, aslak hellesoy <aslak.hellesoy at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On 6/6/06, Cuong Tran <cuong.tran at gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > I'm just a rspec beginner but I would vote for DOT since it's a bit
> easier
> > on my finger :-)
> > My little finger is overwork already.
> >
>
> Vote noted, but I think it's more important to please eyes than
> fingers. Readability has high importance in RSpec land.
>
> What reads best to you? dots or underscores? Indifferent?
>
> Aslak
>
> >
> > On 6/6/06, David Chelimsky <dchelimsky at gmail.com> wrote:
> > > On 6/6/06, Lachie < lachiec at gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > The dots made me look twice at rSpec in the first place, but it was
> > > > more because it was such a novel approach.
> > > >
> > > > in the end
> > > > +1 Underscore
> > > >
> > >
> > > Bear in mind that the initial syntax was underscores. The dots were
> > > introduced later in order to make the implementation simpler and more
> > > robust. So from an implementation standpoint, I'd prefer to only
> > > support dots. From a usability standpoint, I'd like to use
> > > underscores. So, since I live on both sides of that divide:
> > >
> > > +. 5 Dots
> > > + .5 Underscores
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Rspec-devel mailing list
> > > Rspec-devel at rubyforge.org
> > > http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-devel
> > >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Rspec-devel mailing list
> > Rspec-devel at rubyforge.org
> > http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-devel
> >
> >
> _______________________________________________
> Rspec-devel mailing list
> Rspec-devel at rubyforge.org
> http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-devel
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://rubyforge.org/pipermail/rspec-devel/attachments/20060606/f2fcd62b/attachment-0001.htm