CLUnit ?

[Steven Núñez]

Does anyone know if there was a good reason for selecting CLUnit? I was thinking about writing some unit tests, and notice that whilst it does have documentation, the systems is broken in several places. Is it working for anyone here?

 

Also, looking for alternatives, I found this blog from 2013: http://russ.unwashedmeme.com/blog/. Things probably haven’t changed too much since then. There it seems to indicate that Stefil and Fiveam are far and away more widely used.

 

Any thoughts on standardizing on something other than CLUnit (assuming I’m not the only one struggling with making it work).

 

Regards,

-          SteveN

 

[David Hodge]

I think that a recurrent nit with CL that seems to get picked with frustrating regularity is the whole testing framework thing.

I have not had problems with CLUnit in the past but don't use it for my other projects - I usually use 5am.

Cheers

Steven Núñez

3 August 2015 9:46 am

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Common Lisp Statistics" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to lisp-stat+...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to lisp...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/lisp-stat.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[A.J. Rossini]

There are 2 clunits did you get the right one? I picked it because a later article suggested it was better and after trying it out, found it better than lisp-unit and lift.

--

[Steven Núñez]

I got the same one that you cloned on github. It was sufficiently broken that I wasn’t able to work through the examples in the tutorial. I switched to fiveam and that seems to be maintained and working fine. I’d be interested in reading the later article if you have it.

[A.J. Rossini]

Feel free to add what you want - happy to switch if you code and document :)

[A.J. Rossini]

And you need to be specific about "broken".

Ie what you specifically did, what you expected, and why it is wrong... Test cases preferred (so we can write a unit test for you :)).

[David Hodge]

So I have just loaded CLS and run the tests.

The infrastructure worked fine.

Steve, you need to show us the error

Cheers

A.J. Rossini

3 August 2015 4:28 pm

And you need to be specific about "broken".

Ie what you specifically did, what you expected, and why it is wrong... Test cases preferred (so we can write a unit test for you :)).

--

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Common Lisp Statistics" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to lisp-stat+...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to lisp...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/lisp-stat.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

A.J. Rossini

3 August 2015 4:17 pm

Feel free to add what you want - happy to switch if you code and document :)

--

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Common Lisp Statistics" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to lisp-stat+...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to lisp...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/lisp-stat.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Steven Núñez

3 August 2015 4:05 pm

I got the same one that you cloned on github. It was sufficiently broken that I wasn’t able to work through the examples in the tutorial. I switched to fiveam and that seems to be maintained and working fine. I’d be interested in reading the later article if you have it.

 

From: lisp...@googlegroups.com [mailto:lisp...@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of A.J. Rossini
Sent: 2 August, 2015 21:04
To: lisp-stat <lisp...@googlegroups.com>
Subject: Re: [lisp-stat] CLUnit ?

 

There are 2 clunits did you get the right one? I picked it because a later article suggested it was better and after trying it out, found it better than lisp-unit and lift.

On Aug 2, 2015 23:46, "Steven Núñez" <steven...@illation.com> wrote:

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Common Lisp Statistics" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to lisp-stat+...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to lisp...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/lisp-stat.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Common Lisp Statistics" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to lisp-stat+...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to lisp...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/lisp-stat.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

A.J. Rossini

3 August 2015 4:03 pm

There are 2 clunits did you get the right one? I picked it because a later article suggested it was better and after trying it out, found it better than lisp-unit and lift.

--

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Common Lisp Statistics" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to lisp-stat+...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to lisp...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/lisp-stat.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Steven Núñez

3 August 2015 9:46 am

Does anyone know if there was a good reason for selecting CLUnit? I was thinking about writing some unit tests, and notice that whilst it does have documentation, the systems is broken in several places. Is it working for anyone here?

 

Also, looking for alternatives, I found this blog from 2013: http://russ.unwashedmeme.com/blog/. Things probably haven’t changed too much since then. There it seems to indicate that Stefil and Fiveam are far and away more widely used.

 

Any thoughts on standardizing on something other than CLUnit (assuming I’m not the only one struggling with making it work).

 

Regards,

-          SteveN

 

[Steven Núñez]

Thanks guys. I reported the error on the github site for CLUnit.

--

[A.J. Rossini]

Yes, but what was it (do you have a quick link to it?)

[Steven Núñez]

https://github.com/tgutu/clunit/issues/10

 

I think the issue here, besides some things being broken, is the fact that CLUnit is unmaintained. Sure, we could maintain it ourselves, but given that we barely have enough manpower to keep CL-stat alive (and some would debate that), do we really need to be also maintaining a unit testing framework?

 

-          Steve

[A.J. Rossini]

Steve, I think you are bike shedding :).. The issue you point out is not important and can be solved with a macro. In fact, equality is tricky enough to never want a non-specific test... As I said, i am happy to listen and convert if you standardize the tests to the system you select and write some docs and examples for use :)..

Just tell me which branch to pull and merge :).

[Steven Núñez]

I don’t think I’m bike shedding at all; I’m being realistic. Yes, I could probably have fixed it easily. The reality is I want to use something that works and I don’t have time to run into all the corners of the dependencies. That’s the main reason for suggesting something other than CLUnit.

[A.J. Rossini]

As I said, when you have done the conversion or written a macro to convert, I will follow happily. 

Until then.....

--
Sent from }*~£%¥>%=,?