Three hours ago, Matthias Felleisen wrote:
>
> Can this be abstracted into a linguistic construct and supplied via
> rackunit? or syntax/rackunit?
As a side note, it's something that my testing library has been doing
with the plain `=>':
#lang racket
(require tests/eli-tester)
(test (λ) =error> "bad syntax")
But it also does it for all tests, for example:
(test (λ) => 3) ; test failure, runtime, not a syntax error
Which I think most people didn't want. (And IIRC the conclusion was
that there should be a specific arrow for them.)
--
((lambda (x) (x x)) (lambda (x) (x x))) Eli Barzilay:
http://barzilay.org/ Maze is Life!
____________________
Racket Users list:
http://lists.racket-lang.org/users
