| Commit message (Collapse) | Author | Age | Files | Lines |
|---|
| | |
|
| | |
|
| |
|
|
| |
We've had this ability for Mu scenarios forever.
|
| | |
|
| | |
|
| | |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
Instead of setup() and teardown() we'll just use a reset() function from
now on, which will bring the machine back to a good state before each
test or run, and also before exit (to avoid memory leaks).
|
| |
|
|
|
| |
I'm in the process of making it more self-contained so I can use it in
another project.
|
| | |
|
| | |
|
| | |
|
| | |
|
| | |
|
| |
|
|
| |
Coalesce all the management of number of failed scenarios.
|
| | |
|
| | |
|
| | |
|
| | |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
I added one test to check that divide can return a float, then hacked at
the rippling failures across the entire entire codebase until all tests
pass. Now I need to look at the changes I made and see if there's a
system to them, identify other places that I missed, and figure out the
best way to cover all cases. I also need to show real rather than
encoded values in the traces, but I can't use value() inside reagent
methods because of the name clash with the member variable. So let's
take a snapshot before we attempt any refactoring. This was non-trivial
to get right.
Even if I convince myself that I've gotten it right, I might back this
all out if I can't easily *persuade others* that I've gotten it right.
|
| | |
|
| | |
|
|
|
I've tried to update the Readme, but there are at least a couple of issues.
|