> I think this points to something that should be considered for
> future Ocaml development, that being a comprehensive test suite
> to check the language.

No one can object to this -- just like no one can object to "regular
exercice at the gym is good for you"; it's just that few have the
fortitute to actually do it.  Developing a good test suite takes about
as much effort as writing the software being tested.

For OCaml, we have some test suites for a few specific libraries and
run-time facilities, but that's about it.  Compilers and type-checkers
are even harder to test than run-time libraries.

So, if anyone wants to tackle this challenge, that would be very
useful indeed, but be aware that it's a huge task.

- Xavier Leroy
-------------------
To unsubscribe, mail caml-list-request@inria.fr Archives: http://caml.inria.fr
Bug reports: http://caml.inria.fr/bin/caml-bugs FAQ: http://caml.inria.fr/FAQ/
Beginner's list: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ocaml_beginners