From 7f1156d477b6994ae7cc9cba0ec535c8dea12cd0 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Phil Nash Date: Thu, 29 May 2014 17:10:38 +0100 Subject: [PATCH] Fixed typo --- docs/tutorial.md | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/docs/tutorial.md b/docs/tutorial.md index f79a9a67..aa514d32 100644 --- a/docs/tutorial.md +++ b/docs/tutorial.md @@ -98,7 +98,7 @@ Most test frameworks have a class-based fixture mechanism. That is, test cases m While Catch fully supports this way of working there are a few problems with the approach. In particular the way your code must be split up, and the blunt granularity (you can only have one setup/ teardown pair across a set of methods - sometimes you want slightly different setup in each method - or you may want several levels of setup. We'll revisit that concept shortly and, hopefully, make it clearer). It was problems like these that led James Newkirk, who led the team that built NUnit, to start again from scratch and build xUnit). -Catch takes a different approach (to both NUnit and xUnit) that is a more natural fit for C++ and the C family of languages. This is best explaned through an example: +Catch takes a different approach (to both NUnit and xUnit) that is a more natural fit for C++ and the C family of languages. This is best explained through an example: ```c++ TEST_CASE( "vectors can be sized and resized", "[vector]" ) {