* Janek S.
Talking about good timing - I was just finishing my post on code testing in Haskell when your announcement came up, so your library made it as a last minute news :) I never used golden approach to testing but it is good to know that it exists.
Cool, looking forward to reading it! I hope you won't forget to cover SmallCheck in your article as well. Being also the maintainer of SmallCheck, I want it to steal some fame from QuickCheck :)
*I* think that it might be a good idea to separete your library into two parts: the golden functionality itself and test-framework provider. Right now it seems impossible to use your library outside of test-framework. For me that's not a big deal, cause I use test-framework anyway, but I suspect you could get more users that way.
In theory I totally agree, but: 1. It's hard to guess at the moment how a good interface to the "pure golden" part should look like. 2. I'd rather avoid doing work when there's no demand. So when I see someone interested in using it outside of test-framework, I'm sure we'll figure something out. Roman
According to the test-framework convention, they ought to be named
Test.Framework.Providers.Golden
and
Test.Framework.Providers.Golden.Advanced
respectively, and you can see that it was the case in the early versions: http://hackage.haskell.org/package/test-framework-golden-1.0
But it's just too much to type. Well, I'm already typing Test.Framework.Providers.QuickCheck2, so that's not a big deal really :)
Jan
_______________________________________________ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe