Re: Little Languages for Testing?

[Robby Findler <address@hidden>]

At 15 May 2003 20:00:39 -0400, Eric Kidd wrote:
> Extensive unit testing seems to be getting more popular, thanks to
> better testing libraries, and test-intensive methodologies like XP. 
> Tool support is fairly good: JUnit and similar libraries are pleasant to
> use, and increasingly standard.
> 
> But could we do better?  Some questions:
> 
> * Should there be an intermediate level of access between 'public' and
> 'private' for use by unit tests?
> 
> * If it were possible to declare unit tests in the same file as the
> source code--without code bloat--would this lead to better or worse
> programs?

DrScheme is moving in this direction. Although the unit tests are
external to the unit (`module', in DrScheme's parlance) being tested,
they run as if they were in the body of the module. So, they can test
helpful functions, etc directly.

Robby