Re: [Ocaml-lib-devel] GregorianDate module for OCaml

[skaller <sk...@us...>]

On Sun, 2004-08-08 at 06:36, Brian Hurt wrote:

> There are (at least) two levels of unit testing we want to consider: 
> external unit testing, which gaurentees the library implements the 
> interface correctly, and can (and probably should be) kept external to the 
> library.  Second is internal unit testing, which does need to be in the 
> same file, so it can see all the abstract types and hidden functions to 
> test them.

Actually, I'd be happy with something far less rigid, at least 
at the start: we just need a way to collect and run contributed
tests. Ad hoc testing isn't going to guarrantee anything,
but its better than nothing, IMHO.

There is a LOT more work building and running tests than
actually writing library functions: we should concentrate
on the latter. However currently, there aren't even
cursory tests that demonstrate one function from some
module can actually be linked into a program and runs.

> > > Testing also raises issues of how to build
> > > a test harness to run the tests and report the results.
> > > 
> > 
> > Well, that's already provided by OUnit.
> > 
> 
> I think he meant "how do we write a makefile to run the tests and report 
> the results".

Yes, I meant how do we write a *program* to do that .. note
I didn't say 'makefile'. I'm generally not in favour of 
makefiles, shell script, or Unix tools. They don't work
on all platforms, including many Unix platforms.

I personally prefer script in some high level language
such as Perl or Python, I suppose Ocaml is an option too:
although dynamic typing and loading seems weaker, at least
Ocaml is sure to be installed :)

-- 
John Skaller, mailto:sk...@us...
voice: 061-2-9660-0850, 
snail: PO BOX 401 Glebe NSW 2037 Australia
Checkout the Felix programming language http://felix.sf.net