-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 29
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Namespace - Just FluentAssertions #28
Comments
I'm not sure. If we do, you might end up have collisions with the main assembly. Either way, changing this now is going to be a breaking change. cc @jnyrup |
I believe collisions would only occur if the main library has a conflicting overload In this case JToken/Value/Object Or classname |
Some observations: All FluentAssertions extensions currently use a sub namespace, e.g. Currently without ((JToken)null).Should(); // GenericCollectionAssertions<JToken>
((JValue)null).Should(); // Ambiguous between `ObjectAssertions`, `GenericCollectionAssertions<JToken>` and `ComparableTypeAssertions<JToken>`
((JObject)null).Should(); // `GenericDictionaryAssertions<string, JToken>` I don't think it would harm to unnest the namespace as a breaking change. |
Not sure what you're saying |
@dennisdoomen No, that sentence didn't make an sense. |
I think the other repos could also be moved to Note that this is only the extension class containing the |
Yeah, but changing namespace |
https://github.com/fluentassertions/fluentassertions.json/blob/master/Src/FluentAssertions.Json/JsonAssertionExtensions.cs#L5
Should the namespace for that file be just
FluentAssertions
?Then we won't even need this message in the docs
Be sure to include using FluentAssertions.Json; otherwise false positives may occur.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: