Hi all, Hi Dave, Hi Tim,

with Marcel's okay, I have fixed all the old tests that referred to TestResult error via a new #shouldRaiseError: selector (see SUnit-ct.138 & Co.). What remains is the case of #shouldFix:.

	TestCase >> shouldFix: aBlock 
	
		^self should: aBlock raise: Exception

As this assertion promotes a bad pattern (unconditionally handling all exceptions), has not any sender in the Trunk except its own SUnit test, and is an extension assertion that was not part of the original SUnit standard, I propose to deprecate it with a meaningful notice.

Please object within the next week if you disagree with this proposal. :-)

Best,
Christoph

---
Sent from Squeak Inbox Talk

On 2022-01-20T00:00:51+01:00, christoph.thiede at student.hpi.uni-potsdam.de wrote:

> Inbox because I would not be surprised if there were many (external) senders of this assertion that have aligned their assumptions about this selector to the previous reality. But I don't like this idea at all.
> 
> Here is a different idea which I even tend to prefer: Deprecate meaningless #shouldFix: and introduce new #shouldFail: which scans for TestResult exError.
> 
> As it turns out now, "TestResult error" was indeed used in more places than I was assuming which I now need to rewrite. If you agree to introduce #shouldFail:, then I can rewrite ~40 senders in the Trunk image from "self should: [...] raise: TestResult error" to "self shouldFail: [...]", which I would consider more elegant anyway. :-) Please give feedback!
> 
> Best,
> Christoph
> 
> ---
> Sent from Squeak Inbox Talk
> 
> On 2022-01-19T22:54:56+00:00, commits at source.squeak.org wrote:
> 
> > A new version of SUnit was added to project The Inbox:
> > http://source.squeak.org/inbox/SUnit-ct.137.mcz
> > 
> > ==================== Summary ====================
> > 
> > Name: SUnit-ct.137
> > Author: ct
> > Time: 19 January 2022, 11:54:53.214828 pm
> > UUID: dd617d36-ff31-f143-932d-09d1c332f5dc
> > Ancestors: SUnit-ct.136
> > 
> > Revises exception choice in TestCase >> #shouldFix:. It is a bad practice to handle, or even to search for arbitary Exceptions. Many mechanisms signal possibly unhandled "harmless" exceptions and rely on their #defaultAction. This includes accesses to the source files, debugging operations, and many others. The assertion in its current form makes little sense.
> > 
> > =============== Diff against SUnit-ct.136 ===============
> > 
> > Item was changed:
> >   ----- Method: TestCase>>shouldFix: (in category 'asserting - extensions') -----
> >   shouldFix: aBlock 
> >   
> > + ????^self should: aBlock raise: TestResult exError!
> > - ????^self should: aBlock raise: Exception!
> > 
> > 
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: <http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/pipermail/squeak-dev/attachments/20220120/9390cb9f/attachment.html>
> 
> 
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/pipermail/squeak-dev/attachments/20220131/9f1d381a/attachment.html>