8 hours ago, Matthias Felleisen wrote:
>
> On Apr 30, 2012, at 7:05 PM, Eli Barzilay wrote:
>
> > 3. If you use nightly builds, you can put the test code in a
> > sub-module:
> >
> > #lang racket
> > ...
> > (module+ test (require rackunit))
> > ...
> > (module+ test ...tes
Just now, Matthias Felleisen wrote:
>
> On Apr 30, 2012, at 7:05 PM, Eli Barzilay wrote:
>
> > #lang racket
> > ...
> > (module+ test (require rackunit))
> > ...
> > (module+ test ...test code here...)
> > ...
>
> I have added this sketch to the Style guide, replacing my
On Apr 30, 2012, at 7:05 PM, Eli Barzilay wrote:
>
> 3. If you use nightly builds, you can put the test code in a
> sub-module:
>
> #lang racket
> ...
> (module+ test (require rackunit))
> ...
> (module+ test ...test code here...)
> ...
>
> The `test' submodule (whi
Do try the DrRacket head in git. See #3 below. You can have your cake and eat
it.
Personally:
Use rackunit to
(define/provide-test-suite --test1
... uses internal functions ...)
in "main.rkt"
Import into a file Tests/main.rkt, run with run-test-suite
Always have both file
Thanks for the great suggestions. I agree that I should really be testing
the public interface rather than the implementation. As a Racket n00b, I
write small functions to compose the larger public facing functions, so
testing these smaller/private functions prevents me for going off track.
Than
20 minutes ago, Chad Albers wrote:
> Hi,
>
> As a Ruby dev, I really like unit testing. I've been using RackUnit
> to suits my needs. I was wondering, though, about how people go
> about writing their tests for Racket. Many of the functions that I
> write will not be part of the public API that
Chad Albers wrote at 04/30/2012 06:38 PM:
Is there a way to run unit test against these 'private functions',
without making them public via a (provide)
You want the submodules support that is scheduled for release in Racket
5.4 in August. You can start using submodules now in the nightly buil
7 matches
Mail list logo
