On Mar 29, 3:05 pm, "John D. Hume" <[email protected]> wrote: > This is a cool functional way of defining these, but I think I'd > prefer to just call the fixture function from the tests needing common > setup because of the standard problems with shared setup in unit > tests. (In brief, the test doesn't stand on its own to express what > it's about, so you have to scroll around to figure out what context > the test runs in.)
Hi John, Using macros and calling fixture functions from tests was how I used to do this, too. I think that's still the best way to do per-test fixtures. With the per-namespace fixtures, I'm speficically trying to avoid putting fixture code in every test. I also wanted to do setup and cleanup once per namespace without redefining test-ns-hook. But this is an experiment; it won't be for everyone. We'll see how it works in practice. -Stuart --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Clojure" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/clojure?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
