Re: [racket-dev] okay to require rackunit in modules required at startup?

2011-06-29 Thread John Clements
On Jun 28, 2011, at 11:19 PM, Robby Findler wrote: Yes, please do separate the stepper tests out into another file. Got it, done. John smime.p7s Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature _ For list-related administrative tasks:

Re: [racket-dev] okay to require rackunit in modules required at startup?

2011-06-29 Thread Robby Findler
I think Eli is saying that it would create a bad dependency where badness isn't something that is easy to say precisely what it is, but the rough idea is that there is a hierarchy of modules (ie a grouping of modules into levels of a tree) and dependencies should go one direction. Making drracket

Re: [racket-dev] okay to require rackunit in modules required at startup?

2011-06-29 Thread Eli Barzilay
Four minutes ago, Robby Findler wrote: I think Eli is saying that it would create a bad dependency where Yes, the redundant was a bad translation of something like a dependency we don't really need. badness isn't something that is easy to say precisely what it is, but the rough idea is that

Re: [racket-dev] okay to require rackunit in modules required at startup?

2011-06-29 Thread Sam Tobin-Hochstadt
On Wed, Jun 29, 2011 at 8:10 AM, Robby Findler ro...@eecs.northwestern.edu wrote: On Wed, Jun 29, 2011 at 7:40 PM, Sam Tobin-Hochstadt sa...@ccs.neu.edu wrote: On Wed, Jun 29, 2011 at 2:52 AM, Eli Barzilay e...@barzilay.org wrote: [*] As an example, rackunit might become dependent on drr in

[racket-dev] okay to require rackunit in modules required at startup?

2011-06-28 Thread John Clements
In certain places, I know that we're trying to be careful to minimize 'require's that occur as part of DrRacket startup. Is 'rackunit' something we're trying to avoid? Specifically, I have old unit tests in collects/stepper/private/shared.rkt that I'd like to revive as rackunit tests. John