Fwd: [Haskell-cafe] Data.Tree.Zipper in the standard libraries

[Krasimir Angelov]

In this case the recommendation to write QuickCheck tests should be
removed from the library submission procedure. I don't want to do
wasted work again!

On Sat, May 31, 2008 at 1:16 PM, Ian Lynagh <igloo at earth.li> wrote:
> So just to check, this proposal is to add Data.Tree.Zipper to containers
> and the QC tests to the testsuite, right?
>
> As I've explained before[1], I don't think that QuickCheck tests are a
> good way to test libraries: They tend to test the same inputs (e.g. [])
> or equivalent inputs (e.g. "insert 2 [3]" and "insert 3 [4]") many
> times, meaning it takes much longer to get the same level of testing as
> a few well-chosen unit tests. When you multiply this by all the
> libraries the testsuite is meant to test, this is a significant amount
> of time.
>
> I also don't think that adding the tests but not running them
> automatically is a good idea, as they will most likely just bitrot.
>
> Adding a unit test for the bug you found is certainly a good idea,
> though!
>
>
> [1] http://www.haskell.org/pipermail/libraries/2008-April/009594.html
>
>
> Thanks
> Ian
>
>