Are there alternatives to the `folds-test-suite` and `fold-test-results` functions, for people who want to write their own test running and reporting for Rackunit tests?
Alex. On Wednesday, June 3, 2020 at 2:00:02 AM UTC+8, Jack Firth wrote: > > The test case folding stuff in RackUnit should mostly be ignored, instead > of extended. > > On Saturday, May 23, 2020 at 7:52:21 AM UTC-7, Shriram Krishnamurthi wrote: >> >> The documentation >> >> >> https://docs.racket-lang.org/rackunit/internals.html?q=run-test-case#%28def._%28%28lib._rackunit%2Fmain..rkt%29._foldts-test-suite%29%29 >> >> says that `folds-test-suite` can be implemented in terms of >> `fold-test-results` as follows: >> >> (define >> <https://docs.racket-lang.org/reference/define.html#%28form._%28%28lib._racket%2Fprivate%2Fbase..rkt%29._define%29%29> >> (fold-test-results >> <https://www.google.com/url?q=https%3A%2F%2Fdocs.racket-lang.org%2Frackunit%2Finternals.html%3Fq%3Drun-test-case%23%2528def._%2528%2528lib._rackunit%252Fmain..rkt%2529._fold-test-results%2529%2529&sa=D&sntz=1&usg=AFQjCNHTl9eRUXdisIiw5GwahXRElfJ4PA> >> suite-fn case-fn seed test) >> (foldts-test-suite >> <https://docs.racket-lang.org/rackunit/internals.html?q=run-test-case#%28def._%28%28lib._rackunit%2Fmain..rkt%29._foldts-test-suite%29%29> >> (lambda >> <https://docs.racket-lang.org/reference/lambda.html#%28form._%28%28lib._racket%2Fprivate%2Fbase..rkt%29._lambda%29%29> >> (suite name before >> <https://docs.racket-lang.org/rackunit/api.html?q=run-test-case#%28form._%28%28lib._rackunit%2Fmain..rkt%29._before%29%29> >> after >> <https://docs.racket-lang.org/rackunit/api.html?q=run-test-case#%28form._%28%28lib._rackunit%2Fmain..rkt%29._after%29%29> >> seed) >> (before >> <https://docs.racket-lang.org/rackunit/api.html?q=run-test-case#%28form._%28%28lib._rackunit%2Fmain..rkt%29._before%29%29> >> ) >> (suite-fn name seed)) >> (lambda >> <https://docs.racket-lang.org/reference/lambda.html#%28form._%28%28lib._racket%2Fprivate%2Fbase..rkt%29._lambda%29%29> >> (suite name before >> <https://docs.racket-lang.org/rackunit/api.html?q=run-test-case#%28form._%28%28lib._rackunit%2Fmain..rkt%29._before%29%29> >> after >> <https://docs.racket-lang.org/rackunit/api.html?q=run-test-case#%28form._%28%28lib._rackunit%2Fmain..rkt%29._after%29%29> >> seed kid-seed) >> (after >> <https://docs.racket-lang.org/rackunit/api.html?q=run-test-case#%28form._%28%28lib._rackunit%2Fmain..rkt%29._after%29%29> >> ) >> kid-seed) >> (lambda >> <https://docs.racket-lang.org/reference/lambda.html#%28form._%28%28lib._racket%2Fprivate%2Fbase..rkt%29._lambda%29%29> >> (case >> <https://docs.racket-lang.org/reference/case.html#%28form._%28%28lib._racket%2Fprivate%2Fmore-scheme..rkt%29._case%29%29> >> name action seed) >> (case-fn >> (run-test-case >> <https://docs.racket-lang.org/rackunit/internals.html?q=run-test-case#%28def._%28%28lib._rackunit%2Fmain..rkt%29._run-test-case%29%29> >> name action) >> seed)) >> seed >> test)) >> >> I'm curious why the value of `seed` in the second argument (the fup >> position) — highlighted — is ignored. I was guessing that, since this is a >> tree-fold, there are values "from across" and "from down", and we don't >> want to throw either one away. Wouldn't we want to take a combinator that >> combines the two? >> >> Shriram >> >> -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Racket Users" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/racket-users/3f5561cc-c91e-4cc3-aa90-6fc37e3f028c%40googlegroups.com.
