Remove unnecessary interfaces about kotest

[sksamuel]

Would it be a breaking change? Is that becausr they'd need to add an
import?
On 16 Jun 2016 21:40, "Christian Helmbold" [email protected] wrote:

Some interfaces exist only to hold concrete methods. In languages like
Java and Scala this is necessary, but Kotlin supports top level functions
https://kotlinlang.org/docs/reference/functions.html#function-scope, so
this code can be slightly reduced by removing the interfaces.

The following interfaces could be removed: Inspectors, Eventually,
CollectionMatchers, ExceptionMatchers, IntMatchers, LongMatchers,
MapMatchers, StringMatchers, TypeMatchers. This would be a breaking change.

—
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
#33, or mute the thread
https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe/AAtZGiVW9u2m1kNVKtd52lLgzfKzQ7cGks5qMbSngaJpZM4I3ybP
.

[helmbold]

Yes, the code on the user site would have to be changed due to the required imports.

[sksamuel]

Is there anyway you can inherit imports in Kotlin?
On 16 Jun 2016 21:46, "Christian Helmbold" [email protected] wrote:

Yes, the code on the user site would have to be changed due to the
required imports.

—
You are receiving this because you commented.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
#33 (comment),
or mute the thread
https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe/AAtZGnQPYmbDoTZS5QBpxMSqDSOYVFTKks5qMbYogaJpZM4I3ybP
.

[helmbold]

At least I'm not aware of such a possibility. But you could place the functions to be inherited in interfaces and add them to the test base class :-D

My idea was to keep the code as clean and idiomatic as possible, but maybe using interfaces here is more convenient for the users.

[sksamuel]

I only did it as interfaces because I like them to be in scope automatically, and because its quite "scalay". I've been a Scala developer for 5 years at work, and I haven't touched Java since, so a lot of my opinions are influenced by that.

[helmbold]

When I was writing this issue, I haven't thought of the convenience aspect. I think it is ok, to just close this ticket.