[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
bug#73605: [PATCH] Replace SRFI-64 with a new implementation.
From: |
lloda |
Subject: |
bug#73605: [PATCH] Replace SRFI-64 with a new implementation. |
Date: |
Sat, 26 Oct 2024 20:09:46 +0200 |
> On 26 Oct 2024, at 16:09, Tomas Volf <~@wolfsden.cz> wrote:
>>> * test-approximate requires real arguments. The old version accepted
>>> complex arguments.
>
> No objections, since it seems that (imag-part 0) works just fine, I can
> basically rewrite it to always consider the input complex, and it will
> work.
I think just changing within-epsilon to check (<= (magnitude (- expected
value)) epsilon) would work.
While looking at this I noticed that 1) the default test runner doesn't print
either the computed error or the specified error and 2) test-approximate
doesn't store the computed error in the test result (it does store the
specified error).
This makes it difficult for a custom test runner to print these things. I think
test-approximate should store the computed error and also that these properties
should be documented, so user-defined test routines (to compare other types)
can use them as well.
>>> * The exported variable test-log-to-file is gone.
>
> I oppose to restoring this one. When you loaded test file into REPL, it
> used to just litter your file system with random test log files created
> in whatever the current working directory is. I do not consider that to
> be a good behavior.
I don't think the variable should be restored. I also think that if the option
were to be offered in a different way, not writing files is the better default.
However, users who relied on the variable should not lose functionality.
Perhaps add an argument to the default runner?
Regards
lloda