Hello, I would like to contribute to testing Clojure. (Rich has my CA
already.)
I have been thinking about it and going through some unit tests for
different language. I am proposing this syntax change to macro 'is':
Instead of writing:
(deftest test-+
(is (= (+) 0))
(is (= (+ 1) 1))
(is (= (+ 1 2) 3))
(is (= (+ 1 2 3) 6))
(is (number? (+ 1 2)))
(is (integer? (+ 1 2)))
(throws ClassCastException (+ "abc" 2)))
1) Take multiple expressions instead of just one
(deftest test-+
(is
(= (+) 0)
(= (+ 1) 1)
(= (+ 1 2) 3)
(= (+ 1 2 3) 6)
(number? (+ 1 2))
(integer? (+ 1 2)))
(throws ClassCastException (+ "abc" 2)))
2) Abstract equality tests (the most common tests):
(deftest test-+
(is
(:equal
(+) 0
(+ 1) 1
(+ 1 2) 3
(+ 1 2 3) 6 )
(number? (+ 1 2))
(integer? (+ 1 2)))
(throws ClassCastException (+ "abc" 2)))
I believe that this syntax change would make writing tests easier and less
tedious. Also, personally, I would prefer the name 'check' instead of
'is', but that's just me :-)
Greetings, Frantisek
On Mon, 20 Oct 2008 00:43:44 +0200, Stephen C. Gilardi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>
>
> On Oct 19, 2008, at 5:11 PM, J. McConnell wrote:
>
>> I've been thinking the same thing for awhile now and I'd love to help
>> contribute to an effort like this. Thanks for getting the idea out
>> there.
>
> You're welcome. It seems like clojure.contrib could be a more
> convenient place to keep this than the wiki.
>
> Direct or indirect contributions to clojure.contrib require that the
> contributed code be written by the contributor and that the
> contributor have a contributor agreement on file with Rich. Would that
> be acceptable to people interested in participating? I appreciate the
> care Rich showed and long view he took in coming up with the
> Contributor Agreement process. I think it would be a good idea to
> leverage that process for this effort as well.
>
> Discussion of alternative proposals for a good way to do this and
> place to keep it are welcome.
>
> I made a start on this today. I started with the Reader page at
> clojure.org and started making tests. I'm thinking of a structure like
> this:
>
> Run tests with:
>
> (require 'clojure.contrib.test-clojure)
>
> The definition of clojure.contrib.test-clojure requires subordinate
> test namespaces like
>
> 'clojure.contrib.test-clojure.Reader
> 'clojure.contrib.test-clojure.Evaluation
> 'clojure.contrib.test-clojure.Special-Forms
> ...
>
> with names that correspond to pages on the Clojure web site. After
> requiring the individual test namespaces, test-clojure runs
> "clojure.contrib.test-is/run-tests" on each one.
>
> Here's a sample from clojure.contrib.test-clojure.
>
> (ns clojure.contrib.test-clojure.Reader
> (:use clojure.contrib.test-is))
>
> (deftest t-Symbols
> (is (= 'abc (symbol "abc")))
> (is (= '*+!-_? (symbol "*+!-_?")))
> (is (= 'abc:def:ghi (symbol "abc:def:ghi")))
> (is (= 'abc/def (symbol "abc" "def")))
> (is (= 'abc.def/ghi (symbol "abc.def" "ghi")))
> (is (= 'abc/def.ghi (symbol "abc" "def.ghi")))
> (is (= 'abc:def/ghi:jkl.mno (symbol "abc:def" "ghi:jkl.mno")))
> (is (instance? clojure.lang.Symbol 'alphabet))
> )
>
> ; additional tests to flesh out
> (deftest t-Numbers)
> (deftest t-Characters)
> (deftest t-nil)
> (deftest t-Booleans)
> (deftest t-Keywords)
> (deftest t-Lists)
> (deftest t-Vectors)
> (deftest t-Maps)
> (deftest t-Sets)
> (deftest t-Quote)
> (deftest t-Character)
> (deftest t-Comment)
> (deftest t-Meta)
> (deftest t-Deref)
> (deftest t-Regex)
> (deftest t-Metadata)
> (deftest t-read)
>
> and a run:
>
> user=> (require 'clojure.contrib.test-clojure)
> Testing #<Namespace: clojure.contrib.test-clojure.Reader>
>
> Ran 18 tests with 10 assertions.
> 0 failures, 0 exceptions.
> nil
> user=>
>
> (Currently the number of tests exceeds the number of assertions by so
> much because of the placeholders.)
>
> Tesing Clojure is a big project and will take a lot of work over time.
> There many pieces and many interactions among them to test. The hope
> is that having it available will allow Rich to make changes with an
> even higher degree of confidence that they didn't have unintended
> consequences and to support efforts like Chouser's ClojureScript to
> bring Clojure to new platforms
>
> Discussion and suggestions are welcome.
>
> --Steve
>
>
> >
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Clojure" group.
To post to this group, send email to clojure@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/clojure?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
