Closed facundominguez closed 7 months ago
I was wondering, is this PR good to merge? Or does it need more reviews?
Thanks @martijnbastiaan
I do like a custom data type better (Seed/QuickCheckReplay),
I contributed an implementation of this idea in https://github.com/facundominguez/tasty/pull/1.
I could make it a follow up PR to UnkindPartition/tasty
or maintainers can cherry-pick it if they wish.
I contributed an implementation of this idea in facundominguez#1. I could make it a follow up PR to
UnkindPartition/tasty
or maintainers can cherry-pick it if they wish.
This looks nice. Please add it to this PR + mention the change to QuickCheckReplay
in the changlog + bump major version of tasty-quickcheck
- and I think we'll be good to merge.
@since
pragmas.
[x] add it to this PR
[x] mention the change to
QuickCheckReplay
in the changelog[x] bump major version of
tasty-quickcheck
[ ] please ensure that everything has correct
@since
pragmas.
I added @since 0.11
tags to the data constructors of the QuickCheckReplay
data type. Let me know if more tags are needed.
@facundominguez thanks! README.md
can use an update too, if you are up to it.
@amesgen as an original author of #383, are you happy with this solution?
README.md can use an update too, if you are up to it.
I'm a bit embarrassed to admit that I cannot discover on my own what needs updating there. :see_no_evil:
I'm a bit embarrassed to admit that I cannot discover on my own what needs updating there. 🙈
@facundominguez the output of --help
could be updated, but I'm not sure it was kept up-to-date before anyway.
Thanks for your contribution, merging.
On failure, tasty-quickcheck now suggests string seeds (with an implementation-dependent structure). Integer seeds are still accepted as input though.
Fixes #383