Hi Greg,
Thank you for the very detailed explanation. I was also very much not
my intention to belittle racket-mode and I will evoke my "yes indeed my
knowledge was quite incomplete." I have learned many very useful things
from this thread (C-u C-c C-c is a reminder that stopping by the manual
> Are you using emacs racket-mode? I have experience this issue only in that
> mode since it does not (to my knowledge) implement all the error anchoring
> features of DrRacket.
It might just be that you have DrRacket set to user a higher
errortrace level than racket-mode?
That is, in DrR,
> If you want your tests to catch exceptions you need to wrap them in
> exception handlers, which you could write a macro to do for you; as Eric
> noted though you need to be careful to preserve source locations.
>
This gave me an idea, so I've been reading *rackunit* docs finally. I'm
about
I'll also throw my hat in the ring with handy/test-more, which I'm in the
process of breaking out into a separate module but have not yet found the
tuits to finish.
It takes a different approach than rackunit: Tests always have output
regardless of whether they succeed or fail. Running a
If you want your tests to catch exceptions you need to wrap them in
exception handlers, which you could write a macro to do for you; as Eric
noted though you need to be careful to preserve source locations.
These kinds of issues (error messages and managing source locations when
using macros)
> #lang racket/base
> (define f (λ _ (error 'FAIL)))
> (module+ test
> (require rackunit)
> (define OK (string->unreadable-symbol "OK"))
> (define-syntax-rule (check-OK-form expr)
> (let ([val expr])
> (with-check-info (['input 'expr] ['expected OK] ['actual val])
>
On Tue, Apr 2, 2019 at 1:04 PM Tom Gillespie wrote:
>
> Are you using emacs racket-mode?
I am, almost exclusively. Exception and check failure locations can be a
pain, but they work in general.
> On Tue, Apr 2, 2019 at 3:41 PM zeRusski wrote:
>>
>> If I have many test chunks spread around my
7 matches
Mail list logo
