homepage: http://github.com/nomeata/tasty-expected-failure
changelog-type: ''
hash: 77a1d51c5adf6db5c67f5b7b8b3606402e1ed457e6b52c381f42a2e3c5552171
test-bench-deps: {}
maintainer: mail@joachim-breitner.de
synopsis: Mark tasty tests as failure expected
changelog: ''
basic-deps:
  base: ! '>=4.5 && <4.9'
  tagged: ! '>=0.7 && <0.8'
  tasty: ! '>=0.11'
all-versions:
- '0.11'
author: Joachim Breitner
latest: '0.11'
description-type: markdown
description: ! 'tasty-expected-failure

  ======================


  What is this?

  -------------


  With the function `expectFail` in the provided module

  `ExpectedFailure`, you can mark that you expect test cases to fail,

  and not to pass.


  This can for example be used for test-driven development: Create the tests,

  mark them with `expectFail`, and you can still push

  to the main branch, without your continuous integration branch failing.


  Once someone implements the feature or fixes the bug (maybe unknowingly), the

  test suite will tell him so, due to the now unexpectedly passing test, and he

  can remove the `expectFail` marker.


  The module also provides `ignoreTest` to avoid

  running a test. Both funtions are implemented via the more general

  `warpTest`, which is also provided.


  Why is this not provided by tasty?

  ----------------------------------


  `<rant>`


  The author of the tasty library prefers to provide a minimal experience in the

  tasty library, instead of a batteries-included approach, and chose not to

  include these 39 lines of code in tasty. See the

  [issue](https://github.com/feuerbach/tasty/issues/114) for the discussion.


  Instead I wrote 37 lines of cabal file, a similar number of lines of README,

  created a git repository, created a travis file, run travis to figure out on

  what versions it builds (something that would have happened automatically with

  a pull request for tasty), upload to hackge, add to stackage.


  Furthermore, there is little discoverability: If it were part of the tasty API,

  users would stumble over it. Now they likely won’t. And if they do, they have

  to worry about whether it is still in sync with `tasty`, they have to add it to

  their build-depends, they have to import yet another module. Distribution

  packagers will have yet another package where they have to create the

  packaging, check the copyright, and run autobuilders for.


  Sigh.


  `</rant>`

'
license-name: MIT

Update from Hackage at 2015-09-09T08:18:14+0000
Update from Hackage at 2015-09-09T08:18:14+0000
