Well, if *that's* all it is, I'll feel like quite the heel for putting so much thought into it! ;-)
Assuming failures are rarer, then starting with a just-previously-failed seed would be better as an explicit action, rather than defaulting to a constant? - Chas On Jun 6, 2013, at 3:21 PM, Raoul Duke wrote: > i always thought it was basically solely for letting you re-run the > test that just/previously failed, nothing more weird or silly than > that. -- -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Clojure" group. To post to this group, send email to clojure@googlegroups.com Note that posts from new members are moderated - please be patient with your first post. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/clojure?hl=en --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Clojure" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
