Comments for Virtual Surreality

Comment on Hashrocket man (and I think it’s gonna be a long, long time) by Nick Carroll

Nick Carroll — Mon, 22 Feb 2010 06:27:16 +0000

Hey Josh,

Always thought you were a bit of a space cadet! :p

Congrats on the new job, and hope all is well!

Cheers,
Nick.

Comment on Escape the literal prison. by Saager Mhatre

Saager Mhatre — Fri, 13 Nov 2009 05:47:29 +0000

Oh, and I just remembered http://java.sun.com/javase/6/docs/api/java/util/regex/Pattern.html#quote(java.lang.String)

Comment on Escape the literal prison. by Saager Mhatre

Saager Mhatre — Fri, 13 Nov 2009 05:25:37 +0000

Wouldn’t it have been easier to simply use single quotes in JavaScript?
I usually go with single quotes in JavaScript unless it becomes specifically necessary to use doubles. Saves me a lot of trouble.

Comment on Escape the literal prison. by JG

JG — Mon, 21 Sep 2009 03:06:27 +0000

Josh!!! That’s one of the first questions on the 5.0 certification exam – difference between replace() and replaceAll()

Comment on Stop writing shitty software and stop poverty. by Twitted by friendofasquid

Twitted by friendofasquid — Tue, 08 Sep 2009 14:51:48 +0000

[...] This post was Twitted by friendofasquid [...]

Comment on Indian Summer by Sudhindra Rao

Sudhindra Rao — Fri, 07 Aug 2009 20:44:56 +0000

Hey RoganJoshG…
There I called you what you wanted to be called.

-Sudhindra

Comment on Assertions: actual or expected first? by Srushti

Srushti — Sat, 06 Jun 2009 06:39:19 +0000

On my last project (.net) I created extension methods for assertions as a wrapper around NUnit assertions.

public static void ShouldBe(this T actual, T expected);

The assertions would then read x.ShouldBe(20).

You can also extend this by adding other methods for other assertions:

public static void ShouldBeTrue(this bool actual);

public static void ShouldBeAtLeast(this int actual, int expected);

…and so on.

Comment on Assertions: actual or expected first? by Nick Drew

Nick Drew — Sat, 06 Jun 2009 03:28:06 +0000

So in (rspec originated) BDD we have should matcher
In hamcrest we have assertthat( actual, matcher )
In old Junit we have Assert( expected, actual )
In mstest we have a mix of Assert( actual, expected ) and CollectionsAssert.Contains( actual, element )

All pretty inconsistent.

I have to say that I may I find it easier to maintain complex assertions with the matcher syntax.
For complex document traversals, I may start of with:

assertThat( document, hasXPath( “//book[@title='" + expected_title + "'] ))

but after writing too many very similar xpath expressions, I may find myself with the following:

assertThat( document, hasBook( hasTitle( expected_title ), hasAuthor( expected_author ) )

I find that evolution very powerful, and I find it more convenient to keep the actual values lined up on the left side while the equivalence classes/matchers fluctutate on the right hand side.

Comment on JAOO Australia 2009 by Wow

Wow — Wed, 01 Apr 2009 08:39:26 +0000

Wow Josh – looks like your wife blogs a whole lot more than you do!

Comment on CodeMash by Colin Jack

Colin Jack — Fri, 13 Feb 2009 21:14:29 +0000

So was wonder, did it get recorded?