bf3: > Well, I actually meant more something like the imperative equivalences > of "code coverage tools" and "unit testing tools", because I've read > rumors that in Haskell, unit testing is more difficult because lazy > evaluation will cause the "units" that got tested to be evaluated
We have full control over evaluation though, with bang patterns, seq and deep seq. Generally unit testing is generalised to property testing with QuickCheck, though. For code coverage, combined with testing, use HPC, the program coverage tool now in GHC head. -- Don _______________________________________________ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
