[plt-scheme] Re: Expressivity gap between formal methods and PL's

From: wooks (wookiz at hotmail.com)
Date: Sat May 2 22:34:09 EDT 2009

Turns out that what I have been thinking of is old hat - nicely
encapsulated by the story of tester 4 in this article.

www.geocities.com/harry_robinson_testing/robinson.pdf. Model Based

There is a page of links to papers http://www.geocities.com/model_based_testing/online_papers.htm.
The few (ok one) that I read [Apfelbaum, Doyle] is focused on system/
acceptance testing which is the more interesting problem if you have a
system to deliver.

So Scheme for the creation of a behavioural model to support testing,
based on a formal spec (if one exists) otherwise build it from a bunch
of exploratory tests like Tester 4. Add that to the list of legitimate
ways to use Scheme in your day job without having to tell your boss.

Complete aside.
Ruby seems to be a popular choice for test automation support in the
open source community, I found this link to a purported Gambit Scheme
equivalent on the Watir wikipedia page....  http://code.google.com/p/win-control/

Posted on the users mailing list.