[plt-scheme] Re: General advice on what to use for unit testing

From: Matt Jadud (jadudm at gmail.com)
Date: Mon Nov 24 18:52:26 EST 2008

On Mon, Nov 24, 2008 at 12:48 PM, Ernie Smith <esmith at acanac.net> wrote:
> Regarding your remark,
> As I said in the initial post. I can't be precise.
> I'm looking for insight I don't already have.

Hi Ernie,

I hope I didn't come across as snarky. Your clarification helped a
great deal. That is, it became more clear as to exactly why you
weren't able to be precise. (And if that isn't clear...)

We'll see if others chime in on the thread. Because my programming
time is limited, it is often very task-focused. Ten years ago, I
decided to simply choose the one Scheme implementation (PLT) and stick
with it. I haven't looked back since.

My most visible hacking is in relation to a language/virtual machine
project, where the linker and various supporting tools are written in
PLT Scheme. They all can be compiled to bundled executables for all
major operating systems, and therefore PLT Scheme meets all of my
needs. I can develop on my Mac, and deploy bundles for Windows, Linux,
and Mac. Hence, my limited needs are met. Until such time as the PLT
project "folds," and another Scheme makes it "obsolete," I'm not
(personally) concerned about writing R6RS portable code to protect
myself against an unknown future. (You decide what the scare-quoted
words mean to you. Given that PLT Scheme is open, these aren't actual

Again, thank you for the clarification.


Posted on the users mailing list.