I am confused also, as to both what output you don't like that motivated chell and what exactly hspec silences :) Suffice to say I am able to get a small relevant error message on failure with hspec. I am adding the hspec maintainer to this e-mail- he can answer any of your questions.
On Thu, Aug 11, 2011 at 8:03 AM, John Millikin <[email protected]> wrote: > On Thu, Aug 11, 2011 at 07:52, Greg Weber <[email protected]> wrote: > > It silences HUnit's output, but will tell you what happens when there is > a > > failure- which I think is what you want. There are a few available output > > formatters if you don't like the default output, or you can write your > own > > output formatter. > > I'm a bit confused. From what I can tell, HUnit does not output > *anything* just from running a test -- the result has to be printed > manually. What are you silencing? > > > BDD is really a red herring. Instead of using function names to name > tests > > you can use strings, which are inherently more descriptive. In chell you > > already have `assertions "numbers"`, in hspec it would be `it "numbers"`. > > The preferred style it to remove `test test_Numbers and the test_Numbers > > definition` which are redundant in this case, and instead place that > inline > > where you define the suite, although that is optional. > > So I really can't tell any difference betwee "BDD" and "pass/fail > > assertions". You still just use assertions in hspec. >
_______________________________________________ Haskell-Cafe mailing list [email protected] http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
