-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 59
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
deepEqual(true, [ 1 ]) #26
Comments
this is the same as the node one so we did whatever they did |
I see, I probably didn't read the Readme proper enought the first time.
Well, "derived" is a weak term indeed, so do you even claim that this module conforms to the CJS spec? |
This is literally the node code pulled out and slightly modified to work in On Wed, Oct 12, 2016, 3:29 PM M.K. notifications@github.com wrote:
|
Yeah, that part I understood, thus my question is now about mission and intent. Only when I understand the goals of this module, can I decide which of two possible features I'd like to request.
was the only intent for this package, and it is not Edit: Updated the title to better represent the current state of the issue. |
For what it's worth, I'd rather like to see the relationship of this library to the Node internal module made more explicit in the readme and leave the matter of intention and spec compliance to the Node documentation (but, perhaps link that documentation here). |
Issue became irrelevant because we clarified that this assert doesn't aim to conform to the CommonJS spec. |
Hi!
I'm developing an assert lib and it disagrees with this one:
I'd prefer my lib to also throw an error on this, but I can't find permission for that in the CJS Unit Testing 1.0 spec. According to my lib, rule 7.3 applies, because one of the values is not an object, so they don't "both pass" the typeof object test. As said, I prefer your module's behavior, so what reading of the spec did you come up with to legitimate throwing?
Node.js also throws, but to me it seems it's unintentional there.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: