Difference between revisions of "Blog articles/Testing"
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
DonStewart (talk | contribs) m (→Coq) |
KennKnowles (talk | contribs) |
||
| Line 12: | Line 12: | ||
* [http://lstephen.wordpress.com/2007/07/29/parsec-parser-testing-with-quickcheck/ Parsec Parser Testing with QuickCheck] |
* [http://lstephen.wordpress.com/2007/07/29/parsec-parser-testing-with-quickcheck/ Parsec Parser Testing with QuickCheck] |
||
* [http://disparatemathematician.blogspot.com/2007/08/why-testing-code-should-be-laissez.html QuickCheck : Why Testing code should be Laissez-faire] |
* [http://disparatemathematician.blogspot.com/2007/08/why-testing-code-should-be-laissez.html QuickCheck : Why Testing code should be Laissez-faire] |
||
| + | * [http://www.kennknowles.com/blog/2007/12/03/calculating-the-reflect-rotate-translate-normal-form-for-an-isometry-of-the-plane-in-haskell-and-verifying-it-with-quickcheck/ Calculating the reflect-rotate-translate normal form for an isometry of the plane in Haskell, and verifying it with QuickCheck.] |
||
===HUnit === |
===HUnit === |
||
Revision as of 17:15, 3 December 2007
Type system enforcement
Testing, correctness and proofs
QuickCheck
- Introduction to QuickCheck
- QuickChecking a window manager
- Robustness and QuickCheck
- Parsec Parser Testing with QuickCheck
- QuickCheck : Why Testing code should be Laissez-faire
- Calculating the reflect-rotate-translate normal form for an isometry of the plane in Haskell, and verifying it with QuickCheck.
HUnit
Catch
- Does XMonad crash? On proving pattern coverage with Catch
- Preconditions on XMonad
- Equational Reasoning in Haskell
Proofs
GADTs
Coq
- Strong specifications in Coq: the type says everything
- Proving the monad laws in Coq
- Strongly Specified Functions
Isabelle
Related work
- See the section on theorem provers