Which Common Lisp unit test framework is the most widely used? I want
to get some test harnesses up and running, but don't want to find
myself using something that most people have rejected.
According to KanZen <······@mail.com>:
> Which Common Lisp unit test framework is the most widely used? I want
> to get some test harnesses up and running, but don't want to find
> myself using something that most people have rejected.
I use CLOS-Unit, which API is similar, by design, to the *Unit frameworks.
It is missing an "assertRaises", but that should be easily added.
--
Ng Pheng Siong <····@netmemetic.com>
http://firewall.rulemaker.net -+- Manage Your Firewall Rulebase Changes
http://sandbox.rulemaker.net/ngps -+- Open Source Python Crypto & SSL
······@mail.com (KanZen) writes:
> Which Common Lisp unit test framework is the most widely used? I want
> to get some test harnesses up and running, but don't want to find
> myself using something that most people have rejected.
My impression is the the MIT rt library is pretty widely used. It is
rather old (the "current" version from the CMU AI repository calls
itself "the December 19, 1990 version"), but still works and it's
pretty lightweight/featureless. It simply handles a collection of
tests that consist of normal Lisp forms and their expected return
values; it doesn't follow the xUnit pattern (which isn't a bad thing
for a Lisp testing framework IMHO, especially the representation of
test fixtures as classes with resource management in setup/teardown
methods is useless when you can write WITH-macros for that).
For a more xUnit-like approach, XPTest seems to be popular, which has
recently evolved into the XLUnit framework.
There are lots of others (some of them listed on the cliki page
<http://www.cliki.net/Test%20Framework>), probably because a) Lispers
have very different stylistic preferences and b) it's damn easy to
write such a thing, probably not much harder than learning how to use
an existing one properly.