Allow functions for actual and expected?

[perguth]

Nice for grouping and namespacing purposes I would imagine.

For test methods with arity of 1

Eg t.ok:

'Something more elaborate'.ok(x => {
  // introduce (block) scoped variables etc...
  return someValue
})

For test methods with arity of 2

Eg t.equal:

'Something more elaborate'.equal(x => {
  // introduce (block) scoped variables etc...
  return someValue
}, x => {
  // introduce (block) scoped variables etc...
  return someValue
})

[ljharb]

how would that work with function foo() {}; foo.equals(foo)

[fentas]

You could do function foo() {}; 'foo equals foo'.equals(foo, foo).
Currently tapes test methods are only attached to the String prototype.

[perguth]

Ah, I see. By introducing that feature we would loose the ability to check functions for equality (case: "For test methods with arity of 2").

[perguth]

Anyway, what this points out is that we would break the expectation regarding tapes behaviour. I guess this is a close!?

[ljharb]

More to the point, you'd either lose the ability to ever pass a non-function, or, you'd have your API be wildly different just for function subjects.