[Caml-list] FORT (Framework for Ocaml Regression Testing)

[Caml-list] FORT (Framework for Ocaml Regression Testing)

[Patrick M Doane]

While working on a recent project with Brian Rogoff, it became clear to
both of us that a reusable framework for testing Ocaml code would be very
useful for the community.

An early development version of FORT (Framework for Ocaml Regression
Testing) has been made available for download at: 

  http://www.watson.org/~patrick/fort/

Check it out, and let me know what you think.  I would like to get
comments on the design of the system early and the features that are the
most important to include.  There is still a good bit of support structure
needed (documentation, better installation rules, etc) but it should be
usable at this stage.

Patrick Doane

-------------------
To unsubscribe, mail caml-list-request@inria.fr.  Archives: http://caml.inria.fr

Re: [Caml-list] FORT (Framework for Ocaml Regression Testing)

[Dave Mason]

Looks good!

I realize that this is regression testing, which is important, but I
have used junit quite a lot with Java (increasingly wishing I was
using ocaml), and I think, in general, that junit-style testing is
more useful than regression testing.  So patrick, or someone else,
might want to look at www.junit.org.

Unless I missed someone announcing an ocunit...

../Dave
-------------------
To unsubscribe, mail caml-list-request@inria.fr.  Archives: http://caml.inria.fr

Re: [Caml-list] FORT (Framework for Ocaml Regression Testing)

[Patrick M Doane]

Hi Dave,

I think we may have a different expectation for the terminology.  The
JUnit web page describes it is as a "regression testing framework".  Also,
my initial uses of FORT have been just for unit testing, so I think it
should grow to handle that area of testing well. 

>From a high-level perspective, these systems are more or less the same.
Not having used JUnit, there are probably several low-level primitives
that could be useful to add to FORT.

So, give it a try, and let me know what aspects of JUnit we need to try to
pull in!

Patrick Doane

On Tue, 1 May 2001, Dave Mason wrote:

> Looks good!
> 
> I realize that this is regression testing, which is important, but I
> have used junit quite a lot with Java (increasingly wishing I was
> using ocaml), and I think, in general, that junit-style testing is
> more useful than regression testing.  So patrick, or someone else,
> might want to look at www.junit.org.
> 
> Unless I missed someone announcing an ocunit...
> 
> ../Dave
> 

-------------------
To unsubscribe, mail caml-list-request@inria.fr.  Archives: http://caml.inria.fr