Hi Herbert,
> I was wondering whether doctest could somehow be integrated with
> Haskell's test-framework[1] and/or HTF package[2], as an additional
> test-provider, as I tend to write trivial test-cases as haddock comments
> but more extensive ones as dedicated unit-tests. This would be possible
On Thu, 2011-06-16 at 20:22 +0200, Simon Hengel wrote:
> doctest is a port of Python's doctest[2] to Haskell. It can be used to
> verify, that examples in Haddock comments[3] do still work. This also
> provides you with a simple mechanism to write unit test, without the
> burden of maintaining a
On 17 June 2011 14:36, Luke Palmer wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 16, 2011 at 12:22 PM, Simon Hengel
> wrote:
>>
>> I just uploaded a new version of doctest[1] to Hackage.
>
> Sweet!
>
>>
>> I think using all lower-case package names is a good thing.
>
> I'm just curious -- why?
One reason: if that's the
On Thu, Jun 16, 2011 at 12:22 PM, Simon Hengel wrote:
> I just uploaded a new version of doctest[1] to Hackage.
>
Sweet!
> I think using all lower-case package names is a good thing.
I'm just curious -- why?
Luke
___
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
Haske
I just uploaded a new version of doctest[1] to Hackage.
WHAT IS doctest?
doctest is a port of Python's doctest[2] to Haskell. It can be used to
verify, that examples in Haddock comments[3] do still work. This also
provides you with a simple mechanism to write unit test, withou
