Scheme testing needs some work, so I introduce the Schemetest project
hga@xxxxxx
(20 Aug 2020 17:25 UTC)
|
Re: Scheme testing needs some work, so I introduce the Schemetest project
Arthur A. Gleckler
(20 Aug 2020 17:40 UTC)
|
Re: Scheme testing needs some work, so I introduce the Schemetest project
hga@xxxxxx
(20 Aug 2020 18:09 UTC)
|
Scheme portable testing prior art
Lassi Kortela
(20 Aug 2020 19:00 UTC)
|
Re: Scheme portable testing prior art
Marc Nieper-Wißkirchen
(20 Aug 2020 19:09 UTC)
|
Re: Scheme portable testing prior art
Lassi Kortela
(20 Aug 2020 19:17 UTC)
|
Re: Scheme portable testing prior art
Marc Nieper-Wißkirchen
(20 Aug 2020 19:31 UTC)
|
Re: Scheme portable testing prior art
Per Bothner
(20 Aug 2020 20:58 UTC)
|
Re: Scheme portable testing prior art
Per Bothner
(20 Aug 2020 21:13 UTC)
|
Re: Scheme portable testing prior art
Alex Shinn
(21 Aug 2020 01:54 UTC)
|
Re: Scheme portable testing prior art
Marc Nieper-Wißkirchen
(21 Aug 2020 07:52 UTC)
|
Re: Scheme portable testing prior art
Alex Shinn
(21 Aug 2020 09:16 UTC)
|
Re: Scheme portable testing prior art
Marc Nieper-Wißkirchen
(21 Aug 2020 11:11 UTC)
|
Re: Scheme portable testing prior art
Alex Shinn
(21 Aug 2020 13:41 UTC)
|
Re: Scheme portable testing prior art
John Cowan
(20 Aug 2020 19:25 UTC)
|
Re: Scheme portable testing prior art
Lassi Kortela
(20 Aug 2020 19:39 UTC)
|
Re: Scheme portable testing prior art
Marc Nieper-Wißkirchen
(20 Aug 2020 20:04 UTC)
|
test-error, portability
Lassi Kortela
(20 Aug 2020 20:41 UTC)
|
Re: test-error, portability
Marc Nieper-Wißkirchen
(21 Aug 2020 06:49 UTC)
|
Re: test-error, portability
Per Bothner
(21 Aug 2020 13:21 UTC)
|
Re: test-error, portability
Arthur A. Gleckler
(21 Aug 2020 18:24 UTC)
|
Re: test-error, portability
John Cowan
(21 Aug 2020 21:54 UTC)
|
Re: test-error, portability
Alex Shinn
(22 Aug 2020 15:13 UTC)
|
Re: test-error, portability
hga@xxxxxx
(23 Aug 2020 21:24 UTC)
|
Re: test-error, portability
John Cowan
(23 Aug 2020 21:44 UTC)
|
Re: test-error, portability
Marc Nieper-Wißkirchen
(26 Aug 2020 13:45 UTC)
|
Re: test-error, portability
Marc Nieper-Wißkirchen
(26 Aug 2020 13:43 UTC)
|
Re: Scheme portable testing prior art
John Cowan
(20 Aug 2020 22:05 UTC)
|
Re: Scheme portable testing prior art
Marc Nieper-Wißkirchen
(20 Aug 2020 19:56 UTC)
|
Re: Scheme portable testing prior art
Arthur A. Gleckler
(20 Aug 2020 22:27 UTC)
|
Comments on Arthur's test framework Lassi Kortela (22 Aug 2020 08:56 UTC)
|
Re: Comments on Arthur's test framework
Arthur A. Gleckler
(22 Aug 2020 21:28 UTC)
|
Re: Comments on Arthur's test framework
John Cowan
(22 Aug 2020 22:34 UTC)
|
Re: Comments on Arthur's test framework
Per Bothner
(22 Aug 2020 23:45 UTC)
|
Re: Comments on Arthur's test framework
Arthur A. Gleckler
(23 Aug 2020 00:21 UTC)
|
Re: Comments on Arthur's test framework
Per Bothner
(23 Aug 2020 00:40 UTC)
|
Re: Comments on Arthur's test framework
Arthur A. Gleckler
(23 Aug 2020 01:52 UTC)
|
Re: Scheme portable testing prior art
Alex Shinn
(27 Aug 2020 05:04 UTC)
|
Re: Scheme portable testing prior art
hga@xxxxxx
(21 Aug 2020 16:52 UTC)
|
> * I use my own test framework, attached, which was inspired by the > original version of JUnit. Its important features are: > * Every test is lexically enclosed. What does this mean precisely? > * Every test or group of tests has a name. Testcase names are optional in SRFI 64 and C/C. IIRC group names are required. > * Tests are first-class objects. This is nice. SRFI 64 uses "test specifiers" to refer to tests, I can't find objects in the public interface. Test objects should probably go into a distinct SRFI from the runners and the definition framework. It could be a test middleware in a similar vein as WSGI/Rack/Ring are HTTP middleware. > * One can run tests in a mode where only failures are reported. This > way, one doesn't have to wade through output in order to figure out > whether everything passed, or what failed. Also nice, for the runner. > * It's possible to run individual tests or test groups or all defined > tests. > * Test groups can be defined concisely. In SRFI 64 and C/C this is `test-group` or `test-begin/test-end`. > * Tests only pass if they return the symbol passed. That makes it > harder for buggy tests to appear to pass when they actually never ran. This is completely novel. > * The assert macro uses simple heuristics to display the values that > were passed to it. This makes it less necessary to have a family of > assert macros for different purposes. > * There is an assert-signals-condition macro to test that an > expression causes a particular condition to be raised. Similar to test-error in SRFI 64 and C/C. > * Failure reports show the captured continuation of the failing test. > This continuation can be used with MIT Scheme's debug to walk the > stack of the failure, examining variables, etc. This is particularly > useful when an unexpected condition is raised during the test. This is seriously cool. Would be great to have this in a runner. I think in addition to MIT Scheme, at least Gambit and Chez have a continuation-aware interactive debugger.