Nope. A well-designed replacement for those APIs is sorely needed. On Tuesday, June 2, 2020 at 6:37:17 PM UTC-7, Alex Harsanyi wrote: > > > Are there alternatives to the `folds-test-suite` and `fold-test-results` > functions, for people who want to write their own test running and > reporting for Rackunit tests? > > Alex. > > On Wednesday, June 3, 2020 at 2:00:02 AM UTC+8, Jack Firth wrote: >> >> The test case folding stuff in RackUnit should mostly be ignored, instead >> of extended. >> >> On Saturday, May 23, 2020 at 7:52:21 AM UTC-7, Shriram Krishnamurthi >> wrote: >>> >>> The documentation >>> >>> >>> https://docs.racket-lang.org/rackunit/internals.html?q=run-test-case#%28def._%28%28lib._rackunit%2Fmain..rkt%29._foldts-test-suite%29%29 >>> >>> says that `folds-test-suite` can be implemented in terms of >>> `fold-test-results` as follows: >>> >>> (define >>> <https://docs.racket-lang.org/reference/define.html#%28form._%28%28lib._racket%2Fprivate%2Fbase..rkt%29._define%29%29> >>> (fold-test-results >>> <https://www.google.com/url?q=https%3A%2F%2Fdocs.racket-lang.org%2Frackunit%2Finternals.html%3Fq%3Drun-test-case%23%2528def._%2528%2528lib._rackunit%252Fmain..rkt%2529._fold-test-results%2529%2529&sa=D&sntz=1&usg=AFQjCNHTl9eRUXdisIiw5GwahXRElfJ4PA> >>> suite-fn case-fn seed test) >>> (foldts-test-suite >>> <https://docs.racket-lang.org/rackunit/internals.html?q=run-test-case#%28def._%28%28lib._rackunit%2Fmain..rkt%29._foldts-test-suite%29%29> >>> (lambda >>> <https://docs.racket-lang.org/reference/lambda.html#%28form._%28%28lib._racket%2Fprivate%2Fbase..rkt%29._lambda%29%29> >>> (suite name before >>> <https://docs.racket-lang.org/rackunit/api.html?q=run-test-case#%28form._%28%28lib._rackunit%2Fmain..rkt%29._before%29%29> >>> after >>> <https://docs.racket-lang.org/rackunit/api.html?q=run-test-case#%28form._%28%28lib._rackunit%2Fmain..rkt%29._after%29%29> >>> seed) >>> (before >>> <https://docs.racket-lang.org/rackunit/api.html?q=run-test-case#%28form._%28%28lib._rackunit%2Fmain..rkt%29._before%29%29> >>> ) >>> (suite-fn name seed)) >>> (lambda >>> <https://docs.racket-lang.org/reference/lambda.html#%28form._%28%28lib._racket%2Fprivate%2Fbase..rkt%29._lambda%29%29> >>> (suite name before >>> <https://docs.racket-lang.org/rackunit/api.html?q=run-test-case#%28form._%28%28lib._rackunit%2Fmain..rkt%29._before%29%29> >>> after >>> <https://docs.racket-lang.org/rackunit/api.html?q=run-test-case#%28form._%28%28lib._rackunit%2Fmain..rkt%29._after%29%29> >>> seed kid-seed) >>> (after >>> <https://docs.racket-lang.org/rackunit/api.html?q=run-test-case#%28form._%28%28lib._rackunit%2Fmain..rkt%29._after%29%29> >>> ) >>> kid-seed) >>> (lambda >>> <https://docs.racket-lang.org/reference/lambda.html#%28form._%28%28lib._racket%2Fprivate%2Fbase..rkt%29._lambda%29%29> >>> (case >>> <https://docs.racket-lang.org/reference/case.html#%28form._%28%28lib._racket%2Fprivate%2Fmore-scheme..rkt%29._case%29%29> >>> name action seed) >>> (case-fn >>> (run-test-case >>> <https://docs.racket-lang.org/rackunit/internals.html?q=run-test-case#%28def._%28%28lib._rackunit%2Fmain..rkt%29._run-test-case%29%29> >>> name action) >>> seed)) >>> seed >>> test)) >>> >>> I'm curious why the value of `seed` in the second argument (the fup >>> position) — highlighted — is ignored. I was guessing that, since this is a >>> tree-fold, there are values "from across" and "from down", and we don't >>> want to throw either one away. Wouldn't we want to take a combinator that >>> combines the two? >>> >>> Shriram >>> >>>
-- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Racket Users" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/racket-users/8902b15a-d3e7-4e27-8d65-4ba4dc7243bc%40googlegroups.com.
