README.rdoc in test_unit-given-0.0.1 vs README.rdoc in test_unit-given-0.1.0

@@ -79,32 +79,13 @@
           assert_equal 314,@area
         }
       }
     end
 
-You can also strictly enforce the use in your tests:
 
-    require 'test/unit/given/strict'
+Finally, you can re-use blocks, and use And to create richer expressions:
 
-    class CircleTest < Test::Unit::TestCase
-      include Test::Unit::Given::Strict
-      include Test::Unit::Given::TestThat
-
-      test_that {
-        @circle = Circle.new(10)
-        When {
-          # this causes an error, because there's no Given
-          @area = @circle.area
-        }
-        Then {
-          assert_equal 314,@area
-        }
-      }
-    end
-
-Finally, you can re-use blocks:
-
     class CircleTest < Test::Unit::Given::TestCase
 
       def circle_with_radius(r)
         @circle = Circle.new(r)
       end
@@ -118,18 +99,22 @@
       end
 
       test_that {
         Given circle_with_radius(10)
         When get_radius
+        And {
+          @diameter = @circle.diameter
+        }
         Then area_should_be(314)
+        And {
+          assert_equal 20,@diameter
+        }
       }
     end
 
 === What about block-based assertions, like +assert_raises+
 
-You can use the non-strict version like so:
-
     class CircleTest < Test::Unit::Given::TestCase
 
       test_that "there is no diameter method" do
         Given {
           @cicle = Circle.new(10)
@@ -141,11 +126,9 @@
             }
           end
         }
       end
     end
-
-This won't work in strict mode for now.
 
 == WTF?  Why?
 
 Just because you're using Test::Unit doesn't mean you can't write fluent, easy to understand tests.
 You really don't need RSpec, and RSpec has some baggage, such as nonstandard assignment, confusing class_eval