Open
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Is there a reason about why things are the way they are?
For my purposes, the use of
eval(or evencompile) causes a significant overhead (several times as much as the system-to-be-tested itself) in repeated loads of the same system.Edit: This does break code-containing-macros-with-helper-functions if the tests are in the same file, but I do think this is worth it in the longer run unless there are some other issues.
Edit 2: I'm not entirely sure about merging this; one could try, but in quicklisp alone, there are 300+ systems that depend on fiveam; one could always revert if too many things break.
Edit 3: This also fixes "Fiveam cannot find variables declared in a closure surrounding the test. For example, the following fails." mentioned at https://sabracrolleton.github.io/testing-framework#orga8e7410