Thank you for your quick response! I have used QuickCheck, but SmallCheck I didn't. Thank you! Then I'll try to build such tests into Gitit.
2012/7/11 Strake <strake...@gmail.com>: > On 10/07/2012, Takayuki Muranushi <muranu...@gmail.com> wrote: >> Hello, >> >> I have been a forgetful person, and lots of things I have only >> pretended to understand. I want to change this. So, to educate myself, >> I'd like to write documented tests for many libraries I meet, and also >> publish them onto the web so that others may find them useful or find >> mistakes for me. OK, blog articles are good, but they have no (forced) >> tests. >> >> Maybe some of you have practiced this or developping such tools. I see >> some candidate tools, too. What is your suggestion for this? > > I like SmallCheck myself. Define testable properties of the library, > and SmallCheck will verify them for all cases to a given depth. The > tests can be documented with Haddock like any Haskell code. > > http://hackage.haskell.org/package/smallcheck > > Another similar option is QuickCheck, which will randomly generate > rather than enumerate. > > http://hackage.haskell.org/package/QuickCheck > > Cheers, > Strake -- Takayuki MURANUSHI The Hakubi Center for Advanced Research, Kyoto University http://www.hakubi.kyoto-u.ac.jp/02_mem/h22/muranushi.html _______________________________________________ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
