>>> >> technically yes, but you do not need many things to run the code: >> - class comments >> - method comments >> - any documentation in general >> yet you load them. so I wonder if it makes sense to even load tests >> separately? > > for me there is one big reason to put tests in separate package: modularity.
modularity? what does that have to do with tests? Tests are first class participants of software (well some DO NOT WRITE TESTS). So modularity does not count. There are even class tests which map 1 to 1 to existing classes. How does modularity hold up here? My point is the following: Tests ARE functional documentation and thus should be shipped under any circumstance with the rest of the code. > I usually care a little about modularity when writing tests (they can > use anything from anything, > as long as test fulfills its purpose and covers the functionality i need).. > But in regular code i cannot afford that , because then Kernel will > start depending on Morphic etc.. wait what? that's a 2 level contradiction here :/
