rcf VS snoop

After doing some interactive development, I will occasionally reuse some of this example code and make it into actual, formalised tests in the test namespaces. Some people have started using the comment form for actual tests too, e.g. hyperfiddle/rcf or matthewdowney/rich-comment-tests.

Test lib is https://github.com/hyperfiddle/rcf, which had a release last week – the release is a noop from userland but has a bunch of infrastructure we need (RCF now implements the Clojure/Script analyzer to extend Clojure syntax so that (do x := y) is an async test assertion at any depth in the form.)

Not to make you feel too bad, but based on your sentence you may appreciate a recent addition to my personal REPL toolkit in Clojure which I very much enjoy.

You may remember the rich comment forms in Clojure development as a communication tool to your future self and others. Now someone made them testable https://github.com/hyperfiddle/rcf#readme

I use shadow-cljs server for both node and browser, the REPL is instant. There is some configuring though, you can probably get help in slack. (Shameless plug – JS has lots of async, to tame that at the REPL try https://github.com/hyperfiddle/rcf)

If you have concerns about the correctness of get-book-tags in isolation I would suggest https://github.com/hyperfiddle/rcf,

Based on https://github.com/hyperfiddle/rcf, a REPL-first test macro for Clojure/Script which turns your Rich Comment Forms into tests (in the same file as your functions). It's good, try it!

and if you want something closer to the guardrails syntax there is: https://github.com/CrypticButter/snoop

I've been using it together with https://github.com/CrypticButter/snoop it has been great and really hitting the sweet-spot of what you could expect from a type system.

You can take a look at malli instead of spec. Then take a look at the snoop library (https://github.com/CrypticButter/snoop) that provides some goodies on top of malli to easily define schema for function parameters and return types.