tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-34927953.post5577999004989047464..comments2023-07-09T02:39:33.734-07:00Comments on Jack Cough on Software: Random ThoughtsJosh Coughhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04509343962912103631noreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-34927953.post-37655616546520523432009-04-05T06:53:00.000-07:002009-04-05T06:53:00.000-07:00@Henrick - thanks for the backtick idea. I think i...@Henrick - thanks for the backtick idea. I think it definitely cleans up the code so that its easier to look at. But, it does have an unfortunate, but serious flaw. The compiled method name is full of special characters, and so the reporting in most xUnit frameworks is very difficult to read. <BR/><BR/>I think I'll stick with ScalaTest's FunSuite where I can say:<BR/><BR/>test("the properties are sound for..."){ <BR/> // test code<BR/>}<BR/><BR/>But, the IDE support isn't quite there for ScalaTest yet so, baahh.Josh Coughhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04509343962912103631noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-34927953.post-3412760340824472022009-04-05T04:56:00.000-07:002009-04-05T04:56:00.000-07:00I feel the same way about Java, coming from C++, ....I feel the same way about Java, coming from C++, .net I loved Java, but now after Scala (although I am just in the learning phase) I am beginning to lose interest in the way I HAVE to code in Java.<BR/>btw I like came case better than under scores, perhaps the background still influences :)Monis Iqbalhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02705136015120934248noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-34927953.post-73764925196708696192009-04-05T01:30:00.000-07:002009-04-05T01:30:00.000-07:00I agree on the underscore versus camelCase thing. ...I agree on the underscore versus camelCase thing. For tests or assertions, it's also nice to use backticks:<BR/><BR/>require(`the properties are sound for`(foo))<BR/>def `the properties are sound for`(x: Any) = ...Henrik Huttunenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01845345214435219727noreply@blogger.com