Robert Krook
Robert Krook
I have implemented this :) With some blood, sweat, and tears, it should be in 2.16. Stay tuned
@phadej There is no timeline. I think it will be a nightmare to merge, but worth it.
To clarify; I would not wait if I were you.
Here is a link to the paper describing the work done on this: https://arxiv.org/pdf/2404.16062
I think both of the mentioned PRs could be included, no? #387 seems like low-hanging fruit, and #367 does not seem to affect existing users negatively. They can opt in...
Right, that PR is a bit more substantial. It is a feature that makes a lot of sense, but as you say, there is more design-work involved there than the...
I just looked at it, I like it as well! Your implementation is smaller and perhaps 'easier' to retrofit onto QuickCheck (I did not look at Nicks code yet, only...
For slow tests the current implementation is fine (execution time is not dominated by printing), but for fast ones we need an FPS limiter! :)
In the parallel fork of QC, this is not a problem. The final design might change, but _something_ will be done about this in 2.16.
Hi Peter! I believe you can hack this together using existing features, even if it might seem a bit contrived :) It seems that you would want to decouple generation...