Great job! I have a new idea using s-exps to define tests: simple way: (define-syntax define-examples (syntax-rules () ((_ e ...) (quote (e ...)))))
then we can simply (read the-file) then (match e ((define-examples e ...)) (do-test e)) On Mon, Jul 31, 2017 at 3:35 AM Arne Babenhauserheide <arne_...@web.de> wrote: > Hi, > > > I implemented doctests in Guile which allow writing SRFI-64 tests > directly in the docstring. Here’s a minimal example: > > > (import (examples doctests)) > > (define (one) > "(test 'foo > (test-equal 1 (one)))" > 1) > > (doctests-testmod (current-module)) > > > Writing simple tests directly in the procedure-documentation makes for > very natural test-driven-design which gets extended into basic > documentation automatically: Start the procedure, write a basic test in > the docstring, implement the body till the test passes and finally > create api-docs from the docstrings which then also show basic usage > examples in the tests. > > > My questions: This method here is the simplest implemenation of this > feature. It would be great if you could comment on it. Is this structure > good? Would you do it differently? Is "(test-equal 1 (one))" close > enough to an example in the REPL, or would it serve for better > usage-examples in another structure? > > > The output from running the minimal example is plain SRFI-64 output, > though with extended identifiers: > > > $ ./doctests-testone.scm > %%%% Starting test ._-guile-user--foo--foo (Writing full log to > "._-guile-user--foo--foo.log") > # of expected passes 1 > > $ cat ._-guile-user--foo--foo.log > %%%% Starting test ._-guile-user--foo--foo > Group begin: ._-guile-user--foo--foo > Test begin: > source-line: 2 > source-form: (test-equal "bar" (foo)) > Test end: > result-kind: pass > actual-value: "bar" > expected-value: "bar" > Group end: ._-guile-user--foo--foo > # of expected passes 1 > > > The syntax for the identifier is: > > > ._-<filename-or-module>--<function name>--<testid> > > > I mainly know doctests from Python. There they use a special syntax > which looks like the interpreter. > > For Guile I rather chose to start the tests with "(test 'testname" and > treat as test everything read by (read). > > Avoiding (test-begin 'testname) and (test-end 'testname) makes for > easier parsing. (they are added automatically using the 'testname) > > Here’s a somewhat longer example with the test-execution tucked away in > the main file so it does not interfere with importing the module: > < > https://bitbucket.org/ArneBab/wisp/src/1ce02fce232f429fc1cbd29c666e36d34ec22d76/examples/doctests-test.scm > > > > The full code is available in the wisp-repo: > < > https://bitbucket.org/ArneBab/wisp/src/1ce02fce232f429fc1cbd29c666e36d34ec22d76/examples/doctests.scm > > > > (The code is originally written in wisp, but I decided to use > parenthizes syntax nontheless, because using s-exps makes for more > obvious parsing) > > > Best wishes, > Arne > -- > Unpolitisch sein > heißt politisch sein > ohne es zu merken >
