"Jason Dagit" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Zooko makes a wise point when he recommends our tests be written in
> the same language we use, Haskell. [...] the big reasons to not do
> that are: 1) It's a lot of work to convert all the tests to a new
> language. 2) It's really easy to tell our .sh scripts are doing in
> terms of real commands to reproduce it.
There's a Haskell library called HSH which might help in this respect,
e.g. you could do something along the lines of
test_issue33 = assert_succeeds $ "darcs changes --xml" -|- "xmllint"
Where "darcs changes --xml" and "xmllint" are run by the shell.
_______________________________________________
darcs-users mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.osuosl.org/mailman/listinfo/darcs-users
