Aaron Hinni [mailto:aaron / hinnispace.com] wrote:

> > * In the method assertInstanceOf(klass, object, message="")
> the first
> >   parameter is klass and the second one is object. IMO it's more
> >   natural to switch those two, according to the English sentence:
> >   "that object is an instance of this klass".
>
> This assert is consistent with the model of the other xUnit
> asserts which
> is:
>    assertWhatever( expected, actual )

Hmmm... you're right. Now I'm not sure which it should be, since
assertKindOf() and assertInstanceOf() are contradictory. It should
definitely be either:

	assertInstanceOf(object, klass)
	assertKindOf(object, klass)

Or:

	assertInstanceOf(klass, object)
	assertKindOf(klass, object)

Based on what you said, I'm leaning towards the latter. What does everyone
else think?


Nathaniel

<:((><
+ - -						+ - -
| RoleModel Software, Inc. &		| EQUIP VI
| The XP Software Studio(TM)		|