add parallel,sequential & hoistSpec #82
Conversation
the reason is that using generic instance results in:
```
/dev/purescript-spec/output/Data.Generic.Rep.Show/index.js:13
var GenericShowArgs = function (genericShowArgs) {
^
RangeError: Maximum call stack size exceeded
at new GenericShowArgs (/dev/purescript-spec/output/Data.Generic.Rep.Show/index.js:13:32)
at Object.genericShowArgsArgument (/dev/purescript-spec/output/Data.Generic.Rep.Show/index.js:20:12)
at showGroup (/dev/purescript-spec/output/Test.Spec/index.js:241:228)
at showGroup (/dev/purescript-spec/output/Test.Spec/index.js:241:456)
```
|
First off, cool 👍 I like that it doesn't break the existing API. I have some concerns that are purely usability and functional in nature: What happens when your code crashes? Do we lose all of the logging? Writer just collects right, so if it crashes, I'm assuming you wouldn't get any debug output... |
|
Also, it would be cool to be able to not log unless the test fails :) |
in case of using WriterT over Aff, if Aff crushes due to assertion failure or anything you lose log and ps-spec will mark test as failed.
yes in case of writer you lose messages, so we should mention that in docs/tests and promote use of Reader instead. nice part about hoistSpec is that users can use anything as long as it can be transformed into aff, so it's less of a responsibility of this lib. tho people want we can provide some defaults type/runner |
In some cases you care more about logs when test fails, for diagnostic purposes. |
My point exactly. |
|
Cool - let me know when you feel this is in a reviewable state! |
|
it's in reviewable state, if API looks good then i would add some more tests/docs |
|
@owickstrom, @felixmulder, I've just added some docs and it's ready for review 🎊 |
|
This pr should also fix #68 as users can use |
|
I'm working on also adding support for hooks like in hspec, which is not possible without changing the test ADT so soon will open PR with par/sec execution and hooks. most of this code will be changed so no need to review |
|
Hi! Thanks for keeping at this, I've been on vacation, but I'm back now. Looking forward to the next PR :) |
NOTE: It's still braking change but most of the users will not be affected as only internals are changed and general api is the same
fix #80