Re: [Chicken-users] Unit testing

[Ivan Raikov]

     When I was looking for a suitable unit testing framework, I went
with `testeez' because it had simple examples I could follow. You
already have a testeez-like API in the `test-infrastructure' module,
so hard would it be to extend it so that unit tests that already use
testeez can seemlessly switch to test-infrastructure?


Kon Lovett <address@hidden> writes:


> I am not advocating "test-infrastructure" as the basis. It just  
> already does a lot of what people want (even Felix uses it sometimes  
> due to the HTML report - which I do not like but at least it exists).  
> Also, do not forget that a lot Scheme code uses "testeez" &  
> "SchemeUnit" already. (The 2 SRFI testing frameworks I don't think  
> have much penetration. And "test-infrastructure" has none - except  
> for me!) I wonder if some sort of "test result" coercion might allow  
> all these different unit test frameworks to somehow slot in to a  
> larger scale acceptance test framework.