Eric Kow <ko...@darcs.net> added the comment: So original submitter (me) is a bit nervous about this, and a reviewer too, so maybe we should just reject this for now and come back to it when the re-org dust has settled.
Note-taking for posterity Pro: - ability to test non-exported functions Con: - encourages whitebox rather than blackbox testing Ganesh's preference shows us a link between these two: if we think of exporting things just for testing as being a code smell that could perhaps be eliminated with some re-thinking, maybe the Pro isn't such a Pro after all. When the dust settles, one alternative form of juggling I might consider is renaming Darcs.Test.X to Test.Darcs.X. This seems a bit silly, I realise. The only goal behind this proposal is to make it possible to have a parallel hierarchy including non-Darcs modules, so Test.Lcs and Test.ByteStringUtils for example. But maybe the testing stuff is transparent enough as it is. ---------- status: needs-screening -> rejected __________________________________ Darcs bug tracker <b...@darcs.net> <http://bugs.darcs.net/patch430> __________________________________ _______________________________________________ darcs-users mailing list darcs-users@darcs.net http://lists.osuosl.org/mailman/listinfo/darcs-users
