I have a working code of this but for that I have to reimplement Arbitrary and Testable typeclasses which I don't want to do. I thought it might be possible to use parts of quickcheck without actually changing its code but still I am unable to find a suitable solution.
-Satvik On Sun, Jan 13, 2013 at 2:58 PM, Roman Cheplyaka <r...@ro-che.info> wrote: > * Stephen Tetley <stephen.tet...@gmail.com> [2013-01-13 08:49:08+0000] > > In general you can't do this whether you use pats of QuickCheck or not > > - `randomEvalute` would need to inspect the supplied function to see > > how many input parameters it has so it can list them, but there is no > > such introspection in Haskell. > > This can be done with relatively simple type class hackery. In fact, > QuickCheck already does that in order to generate arguments and print > them in case of failure. > > Roman >
_______________________________________________ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
