On Wed, 2021-03-31 at 23:11 -0700, Aleix Conchillo Flaqué wrote: > * module/srfi/srfi-64/testing.scm: remove unused name variable and use > let instead of let*. >
I don't think this is the correct approach with respect to side effects. For example, in: > (define (%test-comp2 comp x) > (syntax-case (list x (list (syntax quote) (%test-source-line2 x)) comp) > () > (((mac tname expected expr) line comp) > (syntax > - (let* ((r (test-runner-get)) > - (name tname)) > + (let ((r (test-runner-get))) > (test-result-alist! r (cons (cons 'test-name tname) line)) > (%test-comp2body r comp expected expr)))) I would keep the let* (but reverse the binding order), but change 'tname' with 'name' in the call to 'test-result-alist!', such that 'test-X' macros behave somewhat more like procedure calls (except for installing exeption handlers and having access to the s-expression of the code that will be run, of course). It's largely a matter of taste, though. In any case, it is good that 'tname' is now evaluated only once, as per SRFI-64 (notice ***It is evaluated only once.*** (markup mine)): (test-assert [test-name] expression) This evaluates the expression. The test passes if the result is true; if the result is false, a test failure is reported. The test also fails if an exception is raised, assuming the implementation has a way to catch exceptions. How the failure is reported depends on the test runner environment. The test-name is a string that names the test case. (Though the test-name is a string literal in the examples, it is an expression. ***It is evaluated only once.***) It is used when reporting errors, and also when skipping tests, as described below. It is an error to invoke test-assert if there is no current test runner. (My suggestion would be to also evaluate 'test-name' at least once, even if there is no test runner, which seems a bit stricter than SRFI-64 demands, but seems like a nice property to have and easy to achieve.) As this patch does not ‘merely’ fix a warnings, but fixes a bug, could you change the patch message accordingly? Something like srfi-64: fix double evaluation of test-name. perhaps? Greetings, Maxime.
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part