Proposal: is.Less and is.Greater

[jftuga]

Proposal: is.Less and is.Greater

[wliao008]

imho is.True(..) already covers this and more..

[flowchartsman]

I think this would compromise the ergonomics of the library by imposing ordering that you'd need to look at the arguments to know. The only two-argument method currently in the package is Equals(), which, conveniently, does not depend on ordering. Everything else breaks down to a simple boolean clause. The only reason Equals() even exists is because you need to guard against nil comparisons and also do some reflection to cover the most common sort of testing questions. Otherwise you could just do is.True(a==b)

What reads better?

is.True(a < b) // just boolean clauses
is.True(a>b)

or

is.Less(a, b) // which is the one that should be less?
is.Greater(b,a)
// or is it
is.Greater(a,b)
// I guess it depends on the language you speak!

You'd have to read the code to know for sure, since it no longer reads naturally. This is kind of a unique package in that the package name is part of the reading, which makes it feel light and readable, but also constrains the identifiers in expressions (IMHO for the better).