On Thu, 2011-07-28 at 21:25 -0500, Thomas Tuegel wrote: > On Wed, Jul 27, 2011 at 7:32 PM, Duncan Coutts > <duncan.cou...@googlemail.com> wrote:
> > Speaking of IO, do we ever need to deal with test suites that need > > imperative setup and teardown for sets of tests? Individual tests can do > > setup and teardown via the Progress which embeds IO. Does HUnit allow IO > > for sets/groups of tests? > > I can see the utility of this. It would be simple enough to have Group > take an (IO [Tests]) instead of just [Tests]. Note that that's not quite the same thing. That lets you do IO to enumerate the tests, not IO before and after running a group of tests. I'm slightly confused about what you and Johan are talking about with [Tests] etc. Can you post what the new proposed data types are please? As for convenience functions, I don't know if it's worth it. We're not expecting packages to implement this directly. It'll just be for packages like test-framework to implement. But if they're cheap and obvious then I don't object strongly. Duncan _______________________________________________ cabal-devel mailing list cabal-devel@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/cabal-devel
