On Tue, 19 Oct 2004 23:08:35 +0900, Peter Hickman <peter / semantico.com> wrote:
> If this were a voting thing I would go for Nathaniel's syntax as
> Florian's looks like it is commented out and should not be run. Besides
> how would you comment out something in Florian's syntax. I think
> Nathaniel's is much more obvious.

I think Nathaniel's is much more obvious *if you're viewing this
primarily as tests*.

I'm not - these are labelled as "examples", and should IMO primarily
be viewed as examples.  Examples that happen to be tested, and that
happen to include some of the test coverage for the program, but
*primarily* examples, and a part of documentation.

But it looks like I'll have to resign to either presenting bad
documentation to the users or to  having to fix up and maintain the
fixups for thousand of examples for RPA :-(

Eivind.
-- 
Hazzle free packages for Ruby?
RPA is available from http://www.rubyarchive.org/