I'd go with any large file in the source distribution of Coq. In fact, a good test might be to clone the Coq repo, reindent the whole standard library, check these changes in, then reindent again with your changes and look at the git diff. I expect the standard library + the Coq test suite to cover all or almost all of the syntax of Coq.
Clément. On 01/12/2018 10.24, Stefan Monnier wrote: > I have a few tentative changes to coq-smie.el. > Does someone have some kind of test-suite somewhere against which I can > run my new code to try and avoid regressions? > > Ideally, it should be fully automated, including fixing my bugs and > outputting a Coq proof that the result is correct, but I'll settle for > a long file that I need to reindent&check manually. > > So far I have the coq/indent.v but it doesn't seem to include some cases > that are mentioned in coq-smie.el, so I'm hoping someone has something > a bit more complete. > > > Stefan > _______________________________________________ > ProofGeneral-devel mailing list > ProofGeneral-devel@inf.ed.ac.uk > http://lists.inf.ed.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/proofgeneral-devel >
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ ProofGeneral-devel mailing list ProofGeneral-devel@inf.ed.ac.uk http://lists.inf.ed.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/proofgeneral-devel
