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

Add missing function has_composite() without desc #339

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Nov 23, 2024

Conversation

rodo
Copy link
Contributor

@rodo rodo commented Sep 24, 2024

Close Issue #234

@theory
Copy link
Owner

theory commented Nov 5, 2024

I agree this signature should have been there from the start, but this change could break tests using the existing NAME, TEXT signature, as they would now need to specify the data type of the second argument, at least, to distinguish from the new NAME, NAME signature. I've resisted adding such "missing" functions in the past to avoid making people change their code.

But maybe it's not a big deal? I don't know how to evaluate it.

Copy link
Owner

@theory theory left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Actually, now that I read #234 again, I think it makes sense to add these variants.

@rodo
Copy link
Contributor Author

rodo commented Nov 18, 2024

Ok thanks
I can not merge so I let you do it

Add `has_composite(name, name)` and `hasnt_composite(name, name)`, which
allow users to test composites without having to write descriptions.
Resolves theory#234.
@theory theory merged commit 2e4be23 into theory:main Nov 23, 2024
16 checks passed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants