Generators for functions?
Description
Environment
Activity
import August 27, 2014 at 8:21 AM
Comment made by: sperber
Yes. Haven't done that yet, but it would be on my list. Given that functions are objects in Clojure, I think printing should be a little easier than in Haskell.
Reid Draper August 26, 2014 at 8:26 PM
Sure, I've already read through it a bit, but need to read in more detail. How does your implementation handle printing (showing) functions? Do functions shrink? Have you seen Showing and Shrinking Functions by Claessen ?
import August 25, 2014 at 8:06 AM
Comment made by: sperber
Would you be willing to look at my QuickCheck clone as a starting point? Its general implementation approach is very similar to yours, so I think you should feel right at home.
The caveat is that it introduces a type separate from generators - the "arbitrary", corresponding to the `Arbitray' type class in the Haskell code. Doing this to `test.check' would change the API, so maybe there, the `Generator' type should be extended by an optional `transformer' field.
Reid Draper August 21, 2014 at 8:16 PM
I'd love a patch for this! Would you like to write up a quick implementation proposal first, so we can iron out any architectural details before looking at the code?
Details
Assignee
gfredericksgfredericksReporter
importimportPriority
Major
Details
Details
Assignee
gfredericksReporter
importPriority
Major
test.check has generators for first-order types, but not for functions.
In the original QuickCheck, an additional type class ("Arbitrary") handles
functions.
If I implemented this and submitted a patch, would it be likely to be included?
Background: I wrote my own Clojure QuickCheck clone here:
https://bitbucket.org/sperber/deinprogramm.quickcheck
This has arbitraries and function generators, but not all of test.check's goodies.
I'm trying to decide whether to continue maintaining my QuickCheck clone or
instead to contribute ot test.check, so feedback would be much appreciated.