You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
The {testthat} tests read like sentences (à la BDD), and when the description is in the same line as the function name, this can really boost its readability. For example, the following:
I see the point and I was reading up on #549 where we had a similar discussion. I believe that if you can turn an expression into the compact form, e.g. if the result is
test_that('x', {
# stuff
})
we should do that. Compact form means that all opening brackets are on the same line and all closing brackets are on the same line after the transformation.
For example your code:
test_that(
"multiplication works",
{
expect_equal(2*2, 4)
}
)
# can turn into
test_that("multiplication works", { # both opening braces on same line
expect_equal(2*2, 4)
}) # both closing braces on same line
Similarly here
tryCatch(
{
expect_equal(2*2, 4)
}
)
# can turn into
tryCatch({
expect_equal(2*2, 4)
})
Preamble
The
{testthat}
tests read like sentences (à la BDD), and when the description is in the same line as the function name, this can really boost its readability. For example, the following:can be read mentally as
and the formatting helps this mental dialogue.
Actual vs Expected
But when the code is styled differently (e.g. using Allman-style indentation),
{styler}
doesn't restyle it to its more readable version:Do you think
{styler}
should by default restyle such calls? Or doing so violates its "non-invasive" nature?FWIW, the style guide doesn't seem to have anything to say in this matter (except indirectly).
Exception
This is feature request is relevant only when there are no keyword arguments, only positional arguments, are present in the
test_that()
call.The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: