guile/test-suite/tests/hooks.test

;;;; hooks.test --- tests guile's hooks implementation  -*- scheme -*-
;;;; Copyright (C) 1999, 2001, 2006 Free Software Foundation, Inc.
;;;; 
;;;; This library is free software; you can redistribute it and/or
;;;; modify it under the terms of the GNU Lesser General Public
;;;; License as published by the Free Software Foundation; either
;;;; version 2.1 of the License, or (at your option) any later version.
;;;; 
;;;; This library is distributed in the hope that it will be useful,
;;;; but WITHOUT ANY WARRANTY; without even the implied warranty of
;;;; MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.  See the GNU
;;;; Lesser General Public License for more details.
;;;; 
;;;; You should have received a copy of the GNU Lesser General Public
;;;; License along with this library; if not, write to the Free Software
;;;; Foundation, Inc., 51 Franklin Street, Fifth Floor, Boston, MA 02110-1301 USA

;;;
;;; miscellaneous
;;;

;; FIXME:  Maybe a standard wrong-num-arg exception should be thrown instead
;; of a misc-error?  If so, the tests should be changed to expect failure.
(define exception:wrong-num-hook-args
  (cons 'misc-error "Hook .* requires .* arguments"))

;;;
;;; {The tests}
;;;

(let  ((proc1 (lambda (x) (+ x 1)))
       (proc2 (lambda (x) (- x 1)))
       (bad-proc (lambda (x y) #t)))
  (with-test-prefix "hooks"
   (pass-if "make-hook"
     (make-hook 1)
     #t)

   (pass-if "add-hook!"
     (let ((x (make-hook 1)))
       (add-hook! x proc1)
       (add-hook! x proc2)
       #t))

   (with-test-prefix "add-hook!"
		     (pass-if "append"
			      (let ((x (make-hook 1)))
				(add-hook! x proc1)
				(add-hook! x proc2 #t)
				(eq? (cadr (hook->list x))
				     proc2)))
		     (pass-if-exception "illegal proc"
		       exception:wrong-type-arg
		       (let ((x (make-hook 1)))
			 (add-hook! x bad-proc)))
		     (pass-if-exception "illegal hook"
		       exception:wrong-type-arg
		       (add-hook! '(foo) proc1)))
   (pass-if "run-hook"
	    (let ((x (make-hook 1)))
	      (add-hook! x proc1)
	      (add-hook! x proc2)
	      (run-hook x 1)
	      #t))
  (with-test-prefix "run-hook"
		    (pass-if-exception "bad hook"
		      exception:wrong-type-arg
		      (let ((x (cons 'a 'b)))
			(run-hook x 1)))
		    (pass-if-exception "too many args"
		      exception:wrong-num-hook-args
		      (let ((x (make-hook 1)))
			(add-hook! x proc1)
			(add-hook! x proc2)
			(run-hook x 1 2)))

		    (pass-if 
		     "destructive procs"
		     (let ((x (make-hook 1))
			   (dest-proc1 (lambda (x) 
					 (set-car! x 
						   'i-sunk-your-battleship)))
			   (dest-proc2 (lambda (x) (set-cdr! x 'no-way!)))
			   (val '(a-game-of battleship)))
		       (add-hook! x dest-proc1)
		       (add-hook! x dest-proc2 #t)
		       (run-hook x val)
		       (and (eq? (car val) 'i-sunk-your-battleship)
			    (eq? (cdr val) 'no-way!)))))

  (with-test-prefix "remove-hook!"
		    (pass-if ""
			     (let ((x (make-hook 1)))
			       (add-hook! x proc1)
			       (add-hook! x proc2)
			       (remove-hook! x proc1)
			       (not (memq proc1 (hook->list x)))))
		    ; Maybe it should error, but this is probably
		    ; more convienient
		    (pass-if "empty hook"
		      (let ((x (make-hook 1)))
			(remove-hook! x proc1)
			#t)))
  (pass-if "hook->list"
	   (let ((x (make-hook 1)))
	     (add-hook! x proc1)
	     (add-hook! x proc2)
	     (and (memq proc1 (hook->list x))
		  (memq proc2 (hook->list x))
		  #t)))
  (pass-if "reset-hook!"
	   (let ((x (make-hook 1)))
	     (add-hook! x proc1)
	     (add-hook! x proc2)
	     (reset-hook! x)
	     (null? (hook->list x))))
  (with-test-prefix "reset-hook!"
		    (pass-if "empty hook"
			     (let ((x (make-hook 1)))
			       (reset-hook! x)
			       #t))
		    (pass-if-exception "bad hook"
                      exception:wrong-type-arg
		      (reset-hook! '(a b))))))