Chaos Eternal <eternalch...@shlug.org> writes: > 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))
So you’d write something like the following?
(define (foo)
(define-examples
((foo) 'foo))
'foo)
It has the same limitations as I see for define-with-tests (see my other
answer), do you see advantages over the define-with-tests approach?
Best wishes,
Arne
--
Unpolitisch sein
heißt politisch sein
ohne es zu merken
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
