rackunit has check-pred, of course. Robby
On Mon, Nov 19, 2012 at 7:31 PM, Shriram Krishnamurthi <s...@cs.brown.edu> wrote: > Predicates in general would be really awesome. I think the testing > infrastructure for Sperber's book (DMDA) has something like this. > > Making it lightweight is what matters most, whether through a new > match form or a more general predicate form. > > Shriram > > On Mon, Nov 19, 2012 at 8:25 PM, David Van Horn <dvanh...@ccs.neu.edu> wrote: >> On 11/19/12 8:20 PM, Joe Gibbs Politz wrote: >>> >>> > Yeah, that is very nice! (It should begin with "check" not "test" >>> tho, right?) >>> >>> Indeed; Jonah was writing w.r.t plai, which uses test. Should use >>> check- in rackunit. >>> >>> I noticed that this also violates, from the rackunit docs: >>> >>> "Although checks are implemented as macros, which is necessary to grab >>> source location, they are conceptually functions. This means, for >>> instance, checks always evaluate their arguments." >>> >>> I suppose this should go in a separate section of "additional checks" or >>> some such? >> >> >> Maybe the right thing to do is make it lightweight to write predicates with >> match so that you don't even need a separate testing form? >> >> Something like (? P) => (lambda (x) (match x [P true] [_ false])) >> >> David >> >> >> >> _________________________ >> Racket Developers list: >> http://lists.racket-lang.org/dev > _________________________ > Racket Developers list: > http://lists.racket-lang.org/dev _________________________ Racket Developers list: http://lists.racket-lang.org/dev
