Do others think this as well? To me, the shorter names which Adam selected
seem more palatable. Otherwise they get a bit long.
Den tis 17 dec. 2024 06:11Nala Ginrut <nalagin...@gmail.com> skrev:
> 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
>>
>
