I'm not planning on merging this functionality into Base.Test. I think it's nice to keep Base.Test pretty minimal but extensible, and then have extra functionality provided via packages so they're easier for the community to iterate on and contribute to.
-s On Mon, Oct 31, 2016, at 02:17 AM, mmus wrote: > Will these improvements make into Base.Test ? > > On Monday, October 31, 2016 at 12:53:37 AM UTC-4, Spencer > Russell wrote: >> I think in general the culture in the Julia community is very pro- >> testing, which I really appreciate. I saw your post recently about >> PyTest, but I’m generally pretty happy with the built-in `@testset` / >> `@test` system, and just wanted some lightweight convenience >> functionality that wouldn’t require people to restructure their >> existing tests. >> >> -s >> >> >>> On Oct 29, 2016, at 4:30 AM, pdo...@gmail.com wrote: >>> >>> Hey Spencer, >>> >>> I like this! >>> >>> I have recently started a testing-related package as well, maybe >>> you've noticed (https://github.com/pdobacz/PyTest.jl). It seems that >>> both packages could work together and complement quite seamlessly, >>> so I'll definitely give yours a try. >>> >>> BTW, do you think there is much demand for Julia testing tools?
