Remove unnecessary interfaces

[helmbold]

Some interfaces exist only to hold concrete methods. In languages like Java and Scala this is necessary, but Kotlin supports top level functions, 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.

[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" notifications@github.com 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" notifications@github.com 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.