Unit Testing: should I use Base.Test instead of FactCheck?

[Florian Oswald]

I know there are many testing packages out there. I have been using FactCheck, but have seen it's been relegated to the JuliaArchive. I take that as a sign it's a good moment to use something else.

There is 1 thing I sorely miss from Base.Test coming from FactCheck, and that is the ability to say

@fact false --> true "your test failed: false is not true"

i.e. i can print a custom error message to be shown upon failure only.

I also think the display of test results (indentation of lower level "contexts" (@testsets in Base.Test)) is nicer in FactCheck, but that's not that important.

Thanks for any advice.

[Steven G. Johnson]

On Friday, October 28, 2016 at 10:30:28 AM UTC-4, Florian Oswald wrote:

There is 1 thing I sorely miss from Base.Test coming from FactCheck, and that is the ability to say

@fact false --> true "your test failed: false is not true"

@test false || error("your test failed: false is not true.")

[Florian Oswald]

D'oh.

Thanks!

[Spencer Russell]

I generally have pretty granular `@testset`s, which can have messages attached that are printed on failure. That way I still get a description of what failed.

I think the lack of indentation for nested testsets is a regression that hit 0.5 (BaseTestNext on 0.4 indents nested testsets), and there’s currently an issue filed: https://github.com/JuliaLang/julia/issues/18611

so they should get re-prettified soon enough.

-s

[Florian Oswald]

Awesome. Thanks!