Nov 14, 2012 at 1:30 AM
Edited Nov 14, 2012 at 1:33 AM
Good idea to ask here before blindly logging an issue, IMO...
the summary page:
@chilay, the reason we removed messages from everything except True/False is because the asserts should be descriptive enough. Assert.Equal(42, someValue, "someValue should've been 42") doesn't add a lot of value, and if you can't tell what an
assert is testing when you write it, then it's probably broken anyway. Worst case, you can add a comment to the assert method. We left the messages on True/False, because these tend to be the catchall handlers used when a specific assertion is not present.
(the thread continues for a bit too)
From sustained usage, I agree too.
If you search around you'll find that we're in the midst of a transitioning process from MS copyright and MS-only contributions to Brad and Jim both not even fulfilling that criteria. That, combined with the move to git(not hub) should mean pull requests
being accepted sooner or later (but I know nothing and no timelines should be inferred).
See the what's new in 2.0 discussion post for info regarding the main direction of current development.
And go upvote any of my assertion extensions issues now!
EDIT: BTW most people that dont want to confine themselves to the OOTB suite of Assertions use stuff like Shouldly and the 30ish NuGet packages of that ilk which provide various elegant/overkill ways of providing matchers / composibility mechanisms and e.g.
ways of rendering the expressions involved in the message of AssertionException