Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Build and test Erlang exercises with Rebar3 #106

Closed
lpil opened this issue Aug 8, 2016 · 3 comments
Closed

Build and test Erlang exercises with Rebar3 #106

lpil opened this issue Aug 8, 2016 · 3 comments
Assignees
Milestone

Comments

@lpil
Copy link
Sponsor Member

lpil commented Aug 8, 2016

Now that Rebar 3 is the official build tool of Erlang should we use it here?

It would be a little friendlier as the command would be

rebar3 eunit

instead of

erl -make
erl -noshell -eval "eunit:test(accumulate, [verbose])" -s init stop

This would require changing the exercises to use the Erlang OTP project directory structure, which I think would be a good thing.

@kytrinyx
Copy link
Member

@tmcgilchrist @lehoff @NobbZ any thoughts on rebar 3 (and Erlang OTP project directory structure)?

@NobbZ
Copy link
Member

NobbZ commented Aug 12, 2016

I think, migrating to rebar were a good thing as it would make most things much easier. But it would require the student to install just another tool (that he might want to use anyway) since rebar3 might be the officially supposed build tool, but it is not bundled with current versions of the erlang compiler and run time, this is true for debian based distributions at least.

Also I think this should be a migration that happens all at once, and not step by step. I can remember the confusion over at the haskell-track when they switched from runhaskell to stack, and the build tool used was different in every other exercise.

Also I do think, that the track should be revised in general, and I am unsure if we should do this revision in a single step while migrating to rebar or independent from that. I do tend towards doing it in seperate steps though.

@kytrinyx
Copy link
Member

I do tend towards doing it in seperate steps though.

Likewise. I think that it would be easier to make one transition at a time.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants