minor infelicities in style guide
23 views
Skip to first unread message
Hendrik Boom
Sep 6, 2019, 3:46:27 PM9/6/19
to Racket Users
Section 1.1 mentions PLT. Is this obsolete? It is at least confusing
or someone who does not know Racket history.
Section 2.2 Always Test
It should mention that when you formulate a test you should test the
test *before* you modify the code. At present the warning about an
inadequate test is not a clear as if could be, and is mentioned only
after the instruction to modify the code.
-- hendrik
or someone who does not know Racket history.
Section 2.2 Always Test
It should mention that when you formulate a test you should test the
test *before* you modify the code. At present the warning about an
inadequate test is not a clear as if could be, and is mentioned only
after the instruction to modify the code.
-- hendrik
Neil Van Dyke
Sep 6, 2019, 4:02:05 PM9/6/19
to Racket Users
Regarding the discussion of tests expected to fail, and moving
expected-fail tests to different directories, I wonder whether you'd
prefer using an expected-fail annotation per test case.
An annotation seems useful for my own work, and lightweight, but I don't
know about core Racket (especially with the couple decades of legacy
tests done various ways).
https://www.neilvandyke.org/racket/overeasy/#%28part._.Expected_.Failures%29
expected-fail tests to different directories, I wonder whether you'd
prefer using an expected-fail annotation per test case.
An annotation seems useful for my own work, and lightweight, but I don't
know about core Racket (especially with the couple decades of legacy
tests done various ways).
https://www.neilvandyke.org/racket/overeasy/#%28part._.Expected_.Failures%29
Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages