Skip to content

Conversation

@maratal
Copy link
Collaborator

@maratal maratal commented May 19, 2024

Closes #190
This shouldn't alter the behavior of the SDK, so I'm editing this in place.

@maratal maratal requested review from SimonWoolf and ttypic May 19, 2024 22:21
@maratal maratal changed the title Added (forgotten?) test case for RTL2f. Added forgotten test case for RTL2f May 19, 2024
Copy link
Contributor

@ttypic ttypic left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I don't really like that we are mentioning test cases in the spec point, but changes look valid. What do you think @SimonWoolf?

@SimonWoolf
Copy link
Member

SimonWoolf commented May 21, 2024

I agree with Evgeny on both counts

I've never liked the "A test should exist..." spec items. IMO the spec should specify behaviour, and it should be up to the implementer to write whatever tests they need to be sure that they've implemented that behaviour. (And in any case, the spec isn't exhaustive about what tests to write). But if we are going to have that in the spec, no particular objection to this one

@ttypic ttypic merged commit 44300be into main May 22, 2024
@ttypic ttypic deleted the RTL2f-clarification branch May 22, 2024 10:59
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

RTL2f spec is vauge on what test for it should do

4 participants