The preferred activity in your design is more like for-each family, say,
handle the result inside the proc without return result. So maybe it should
be named as for-each-*-in-file, which is more understandable in the first
glance.
Best regards.
On Tue, Dec 17, 2024, 13:31 Adam Faiz <adam.f...@disroot.org> wrote:

> From 258d20a9665e6f845a167258c33374a00e734885 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
> From: AwesomeAdam54321 <adam.f...@disroot.org>
> Date: Tue, 17 Dec 2024 12:20:52 +0800
> Subject: [PATCH] test-suite: Add tests for `for-rdelim-in-port`-related
>  functions.
>
> * test-suite/tests/ports.test: Add test cases for
> `for-delimited-in-port` and `for-line-in-file`.
> ---
>  test-suite/tests/ports.test | 22 ++++++++++++++++++++++
>  1 file changed, 22 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/test-suite/tests/ports.test b/test-suite/tests/ports.test
> index bec5e356c..15d515f1f 100644
> --- a/test-suite/tests/ports.test
> +++ b/test-suite/tests/ports.test
> @@ -2089,6 +2089,28 @@
>            (not (string-index (%search-load-path (basename (test-file)))
>                               #\\))))))
>
> +(let ((lst '())
> +      (lines '())
> +      (string "line1\nline2\nline3")
> +      (filename (test-file)))
> +  (call-with-input-string
> +      "A\0B\0C"
> +    (lambda (port)
> +      (pass-if "for-delimited-in-port returns true upon completion"
> +        (for-delimited-in-port port
> +                               (lambda (entry)
> +                                 (set! lst (cons entry lst)))
> +                               #:delims "\0")
> +        (equal? lst '("C" "B" "A")))))
> +  (let ((port (open-output-file filename)))
> +    (display string port)
> +    (close-port port))
> +  (pass-if "for-line-in-file returns true upon completion"
> +    (for-line-in-file filename
> +                      (lambda (line)
> +                        (set! lines (cons line lines))))
> +    (equal? lines '("line3" "line2" "line1"))))
> +
>  (delete-file (test-file))
>
>  ;;; Local Variables:
> --
> 2.46.0
>

Reply via email to