[Rcpp-devel] Using testthat instead of adding more RUnit tests?

[Dirk Eddelbuettel]

On 7 March 2012 at 10:26, Douglas Bates wrote:
| In other packages I have started using the testthat package instead of
| RUnit for unit tests (it appears that I am in danger of becoming a
| "Hadley fanboy" as Dirk characterizes such people).  One great

Hah! What is the value of ess-toggle-underscore?  ;-)

| advantage of testthat is its repeating the errors after all the tests
| have been run.  RUnit error reports can be lost in the output from R
| CMD check on win-builder.  Also, it is more flexible than RUnit.
| 
| I am adding tests to RcppEigen in advance of a major release
| incorporating Eigen-3.1.0-alpha2 and I think I will switch the tests
| to testthat unless Dirk or others complain vociferously.

I'm pragmatic. If you do the legwork of testing and adapting it to the
package structure I have no particular qualms about switching one day. The
error reporting is a little iffy with RUnit, but it was essentially all we
had at the time...

Another (related) good thing is that Uwe changed how win-builder reports
things, which also seems to help.

Dirk

-- 
"Outside of a dog, a book is a man's best friend. Inside of a dog, it is too
dark to read." -- Groucho Marx