4

...instead of generating 100 new random samples for each property?

My testsuite contains the TemplateHaskell hack explained here [1] to test all functions named prop_*. Running the test program prints

=== prop_foo from tests/lala.lhs:20 ===
+++ OK, passed 100 tests.

=== prop_bar from tests/lala.lhs:28 ===
+++ OK, passed 100 tests.

and it looks like going through 100 random samples for each of the properties.

Problemis: Generating the samples is quite expensive, checking the properties is not. So I'd like to have a means to pass each random sample to each of the prop_* functions instead of creating new (#properties * 100) many samples.

Is there anything like that built in? Actually, I think I'd need a replacement for the splice

$(forAllProperties)

in

main :: IO ()
main
  = do args <- parseArgs <$> getArgs
       s <- $(forAllProperties) $ quickCheckWithResult args
       s ? return () $ exitFailure
  where
    parseArgs as
      = null as ? stdArgs $ stdArgs{ maxSuccess = read $ head as }

[1] Simple haskell unit testing, and QuickCheck exit status on failures, and cabal integration

Community
  • 1
  • 1
stefan
  • 674
  • 1
  • 5
  • 13
  • 2
    `propAllOfThem x = all ($x) [prop1, prop2, prop3]`? – Daniel Wagner Jul 06 '16 at 21:34
  • 1
    @DanielWagner: If you actually meant `($x)`, then I don't understand it (Recall: Template Haskell!). If you meant `($ x)` instead, then no, this has several drawbacks: The properties are not collected automatically, and if one fails I do not see which one, QuickCheck only reports `prop_AllOfThem`. – stefan Jul 07 '16 at 17:37

1 Answers1

0

In this post you can see how to group tests

Stackoverflow post

That user provides a very simple example of use Test.Tasty.QuickCheck

Using testProperty and testGroup you can pass each random sample to each property

In the next link you can check the hackage of this package

Test.Tasty.QuickCheck

Community
  • 1
  • 1
eduardogr
  • 391
  • 5
  • 16