Hi! I usually use the function 'sized' for this. The function would look
something like this:
myIntGen :: Gen Int
myIntGen = sized $ \n - choose (0,f n)
where 'f' is a function that uses the size value to generate an upper value
for your random range. I usually use ^2 or sqrt or something like
Hi all,
I would appreciate it if someone can point me in the right direction with the
following problem.
I'm deliberately implementing a naive Queues packages that uses finite lists as
the underlying representation. I've already read through Hughes' paper and the
article in The Fun of
On Sun, 24 Jul 2011 07:30:56 -0700, Mark Spezzano
mark.spezz...@chariot.net.au wrote:
Hi all,
I would appreciate it if someone can point me in the right direction
with the following problem.
I'm deliberately implementing a naive Queues packages that uses finite
lists as the underlying
Hi Kevin,
Thanks for the response. The first part works well with minor modifications.
Part 2 is still a bit vague to me. I basically want to clamp the Integers
generated within the Queue to between 0 and some positive number. At present
they're giving me numbers all over the place
On 25 July 2011 14:31, Mark Spezzano mark.spezz...@chariot.net.au wrote:
Hi Kevin,
Thanks for the response. The first part works well with minor modifications.
Part 2 is still a bit vague to me. I basically want to clamp the Integers
generated within the Queue to between 0 and some positive
After a few more investigations, I can say
QuickCheck does:
- make easy to finding couter-cases and refactoring codes
- make easy to test some functions if they have good mathematical properties
- generate random test cases
But QuickCheck does *not*:
- help us to find good properties
So what I
On Mon, Sep 28, 2009 at 10:59 AM, Yusaku Hashimoto nonow...@gmail.com wrote:
After a few more investigations, I can say
QuickCheck does:
- make easy to finding couter-cases and refactoring codes
- make easy to test some functions if they have good mathematical properties
- generate random test
Not sure this is what you want, but I thought I'd mention Formal
Specifications for Free:
http://www.erlang.org/euc/08/1005Hughes2.pdf
(I wasn't able to find a better link. That talk is for Erlang, but
people are working on this for Haskell QuickCheck.)
/ Emil
Yusaku Hashimoto skrev:
On Mon, 2009-09-28 at 23:59 +0900, Yusaku Hashimoto wrote:
After a few more investigations, I can say
QuickCheck does:
- make easy to finding couter-cases and refactoring codes
- make easy to test some functions if they have good mathematical properties
- generate random test cases
But
Fantastic.
If I understand correctly it inductively derives equations that hold
for a set of examples.
I am looking forward to see it in Haskell, who is working on the port?
titto
2009/9/28 Emil Axelsson e...@chalmers.se:
Not sure this is what you want, but I thought I'd mention Formal
Pasqualino Titto Assini skrev:
Fantastic.
If I understand correctly it inductively derives equations that hold
for a set of examples.
AFAIU, it enumerates a set of terms and uses random testing to
approximate an equivalence relation for these. The real trick,
apparently, is in filtering out
Hello, I recently worked with QuickCheck for a while, But I still
can't handle it well, And a few questions come to my mind.
1. How to find properties
In QuickCheck examples on the codes or the papers, they find good
properties easily. How did they find these properties? What property
can make
On Sun, Sep 27, 2009 at 3:19 PM, Yusaku Hashimoto nonow...@gmail.com wrote:
...
Do you think I wasted times? Have you ever tried PDD? And has it
worked? If you have experience with TDD, how do you think about PDD?
If you have any answers in any questions above, please tell me them.
Thanks in
On Mon, Sep 28, 2009 at 4:42 AM, Gwern Branwen gwe...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sun, Sep 27, 2009 at 3:19 PM, Yusaku Hashimoto nonow...@gmail.com
wrote:
...
Do you think I wasted times? Have you ever tried PDD? And has it
worked? If you have experience with TDD, how do you think about PDD?
If
14 matches
Mail list logo
