On 02/18/2011 02:12 PM, Eli Barzilay wrote:
25 minutes ago, Ryan Culpepper wrote:
On 02/18/2011 07:30 AM, Eli Barzilay wrote:
50 minutes ago, Ryan Culpepper wrote:
On 02/15/2011 07:28 AM, Eli Barzilay wrote:
And finaly, there's the litmus test for existing code:
* Ryan: is something like
On Sun, Feb 20, 2011 at 7:08 PM, Ryan Culpepper ry...@ccs.neu.edu wrote:
I also generalized the idea of test headers based on a long-standing feature
request (the ability to designate tests as expected to fail).
Thank you! This is indeed something I've wanted for a long time.
--
sam th
Ryan, thank you very much for refocusing the discussion
about testing on the essence and away from the superficial
syntactic issues. Syntax, as we all know, is just a macro
[which some people may get backwards and conclude that
testing is just a macro. Nothing could be further from
the truth,
50 minutes ago, Ryan Culpepper wrote:
On 02/15/2011 07:28 AM, Eli Barzilay wrote:
And finaly, there's the litmus test for existing code:
* Ryan: is something like this enough to implement the GUI layer?
Not well, I think. The Test-Result type in Noel's racktest code is
too simple and
On 02/18/2011 07:30 AM, Eli Barzilay wrote:
50 minutes ago, Ryan Culpepper wrote:
On 02/15/2011 07:28 AM, Eli Barzilay wrote:
And finaly, there's the litmus test for existing code:
* Ryan: is something like this enough to implement the GUI layer?
Not well, I think. The Test-Result type in
On 02/15/2011 07:28 AM, Eli Barzilay wrote:
And finaly, there's the litmus test for existing code:
* Ryan: is something like this enough to implement the GUI layer?
Not well, I think. The Test-Result type in Noel's racktest code is too
simple and inflexible. It represents the minimal essence
Three minutes ago, Noel Welsh wrote:
What I have built is the foundations more or less as you described
them 2009.
I'll move this to the dev list. (Probably even better to take it
off-line.) These are the problems that I see in this being that
foundational thing:
* It uses TR -- but it has
[Trimmed Neil from CCs]
On Tue, Feb 15, 2011 at 12:32 PM, Eli Barzilay e...@barzilay.org wrote:
* It uses TR -- but it has to be very minimal. (*Extremely* minimal,
since it's a candidate for inclusion in the `racket' language, which
is why I was thinking of not much more than agreed
Eli Barzilay wrote at 02/15/2011 07:32 AM:
* It uses TR -- but it has to be very minimal. (*Extremely* minimal, since
it's a candidate for inclusion in the `racket' language, which is why I was
thinking of not much more than agreed structs and parameters.)
A related consideration is that,
5 minutes ago, Neil Van Dyke wrote:
Eli Barzilay wrote at 02/15/2011 07:32 AM:
* It uses TR -- but it has to be very minimal. (*Extremely*
minimal, since it's a candidate for inclusion in the `racket'
language, which is why I was thinking of not much more than
agreed structs and
20 minutes ago, Noel Welsh wrote:
On Tue, Feb 15, 2011 at 12:32 PM, Eli Barzilay e...@barzilay.org wrote:
* It uses TR -- but it has to be very minimal. (*Extremely* minimal,
since it's a candidate for inclusion in the `racket' language, which
is why I was thinking of not much more
11 matches
Mail list logo
