On Wed, Mar 28, 2018 at 11:37 PM,  <xxxxxx@gmx.net> wrote:
> Yes, I'd love collaboration ;) I'll look into this after easter, not
> much time right now. The idea was to check coverage of r7rs-large (once
> it's done), but I'll gladly extend it to also support checking for
> SRFIs.

My immediate goal is for R7RS-small and also the most important
SRFI's, for example 1 (lists).

> The reason for the comments is that I split the file, and only run one
> test at a time. Otherwise, some Schemes die, because some symbols are
> undefined or because they don't support some syntax. Having multiple
> tests in one file (which is passed to a Scheme) is not something that
> seemed to work well.

I agree with this.  In fact after I wrote an email I thought about
exactly the same issue.

However I also have a solution:  we could write a simple Scheme script
that uses `read` to read each test and spit out a file only with that
s-expression.  (In my proposal a `test-group` would be the only
allowed top-level statement, and inside `test-group` one can mix
`test` statements and "normal" tests.)

> Thanks for these suggestions! I'll ponder them, and get back to you a
> few days after easter! I'm sure we can work out a satisfactory solution
> for both of us, I think our goals are very similar!

Until then I'll try to come-up with a running proposal that matches
both our goals.

Ciprian.