Re: [Haskell-cafe] Generating arbitrary functions with QuickCheck?
The type (String - Maybe (a, String)) should already be an instance of arbitrary if a is. One way of generating functions is to have some sort of hashing function (a - Int). Functions from a to b can be generating by using the hash value to transform the random seed before the b is generated. Here is a rough outline for such a system: genB :: StdGen - B hashA :: A - Int transformGen :: Int - StdGen - StdGen genFun :: StdGen - (A - B) genFun g a = genB $ transformGen (hashA a) g In QC you have this instance: (CoArbitraryhttp://hackage.haskell.org/packages/archive/QuickCheck/2.1.0.1/doc/html/Test-QuickCheck-Arbitrary.html#t:CoArbitrary a, Arbitraryhttp://hackage.haskell.org/packages/archive/QuickCheck/2.1.0.1/doc/html/Test-QuickCheck-Arbitrary.html#t:Arbitrary b) = Arbitraryhttp://hackage.haskell.org/packages/archive/QuickCheck/2.1.0.1/doc/html/Test-QuickCheck-Arbitrary.html#t:Arbitrary (a - b) And CoArbitrary is the class where you implement the trick described above. Look at the function called variant as well. /J On 16 September 2010 02:59, Ivan Lazar Miljenovic ivan.miljeno...@gmail.com wrote: On 16 September 2010 01:58, Thomas Davie tom.da...@gmail.com wrote: Firstly, as far as i can tell, one cannot declare a type synonym to be an instance of a type class, thus how would you make it an instance of Arbitrary? The standard solution here is to create a newtype, and generate them instead. I've also written and used dedicated generation functions (especially for Strings, since I don't want _really_ arbitrary strings since some of them might accidentally bring up formatting that my parser can't cope with (or will parse as something else). Note that this is more for generating sub-parts of other data types, rather than for types I want to be able to run QC tests on. -- Ivan Lazar Miljenovic ivan.miljeno...@gmail.com IvanMiljenovic.wordpress.com ___ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe ___ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
[Haskell-cafe] Generating arbitrary functions with QuickCheck?
Hi, I'v been reading a small paper/lesson on writing parser combinators in Haskell, and it seems more or less straightforward. In this case a parser is defined thusly: type Parser a = String - Maybe (a, String) And then it goes on to list some simple parsers, and then starts going on about combinators. I was wondering how one would write quickcheck properties for the items presented in the paper, and the answer seemed fairly straightforward for the actual parsers. But how on earth would you write a test for a combinator? Presumable one would need to make the type an instance of Arbitrary. I see two problems: Firstly, as far as i can tell, one cannot declare a type synonym to be an instance of a type class, thus how would you make it an instance of Arbitrary? Secondly, (and more importantly, or at least more interesting) I can see how one would make a generator for simple compound data types, but how on earth do you make a generator produce functions?___ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
Re: [Haskell-cafe] Generating arbitrary functions with QuickCheck?
On 15 Sep 2010, at 16:29, Matias Eyzaguirre wrote: Hi, I'v been reading a small paper/lesson on writing parser combinators in Haskell, and it seems more or less straightforward. In this case a parser is defined thusly: type Parser a = String - Maybe (a, String) And then it goes on to list some simple parsers, and then starts going on about combinators. I was wondering how one would write quickcheck properties for the items presented in the paper, and the answer seemed fairly straightforward for the actual parsers. But how on earth would you write a test for a combinator? Presumable one would need to make the type an instance of Arbitrary. I see two problems: Firstly, as far as i can tell, one cannot declare a type synonym to be an instance of a type class, thus how would you make it an instance of Arbitrary? The standard solution here is to create a newtype, and generate them instead. Secondly, (and more importantly, or at least more interesting) I can see how one would make a generator for simple compound data types, but how on earth do you make a generator produce functions? With some difficulty, but it can be done. You could for example, select at random, a combinator or axiomatic parser, on selecting a combinator, generate a pair of parsers to hand to it with a slightly lower chance of generating a combinator and stick them together. Bob___ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
Re: [Haskell-cafe] Generating arbitrary functions with QuickCheck?
On 15 September 2010 16:29, Matias Eyzaguirre dente...@gmail.com wrote: Secondly, (and more importantly, or at least more interesting) I can see how one would make a generator for simple compound data types, but how on earth do you make a generator produce functions?___ There are papers by Pieter Koopman and colleagues describing function generation for GAst - the Clean equivalent to QuickCheck: http://www.st.cs.ru.nl/Onderzoek/Publicaties/publicaties.html ___ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
Re: [Haskell-cafe] Generating arbitrary functions with QuickCheck?
On 16 September 2010 01:58, Thomas Davie tom.da...@gmail.com wrote: Firstly, as far as i can tell, one cannot declare a type synonym to be an instance of a type class, thus how would you make it an instance of Arbitrary? The standard solution here is to create a newtype, and generate them instead. I've also written and used dedicated generation functions (especially for Strings, since I don't want _really_ arbitrary strings since some of them might accidentally bring up formatting that my parser can't cope with (or will parse as something else). Note that this is more for generating sub-parts of other data types, rather than for types I want to be able to run QC tests on. -- Ivan Lazar Miljenovic ivan.miljeno...@gmail.com IvanMiljenovic.wordpress.com ___ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe