To factorize code of test sets (or not)

[Phil Estival]

* [2025-01-07 19:38] Ihor Radchenko:> Phil Estival <pe@7d.nz> writes:
> > [...]
> > Some macros [for test suite] should probably be moved upward
> > in a file where generic functions which purposes are to help
> > writing the tests of babel source blocks should be declared.
>
> I do not mind.
> But please show which _other_ tests can benefit from the simplification.

This may appear as an unnecessary effort to refactor, or worse,
normalize a code that can benefit from some diversity
yet,
the forms

  (should
   (equal "<str result>"
     (org-test-with-temp-text "<block>"
     (org-babel-next-src-block)
     (org-trim (org-babel-execute-src-block))))))

or

(org-test-with-temp-text "<block>"
    (org-babel-next-src-block)
    (should (equal '(<something>) ;; or (should (string= "<str>
       (org-babel-execute-src-block))))
;; or org-babel-execute-maybe for ruby and elisp

exist in
test-ob-[maxima,R,sqlite,sed,shell,plantuml,lua,java,julia,lob,octave,perl,python,emacs-lisp].el

Considering it at the repetitive pattern, I think a macro can shorten
those forms to :

(ob-test  "<preamble + block>"
  :expect  "<expected-result>")

and a variant to test or exclude matching regexp

(ob-test  "<preamble+block>"
  :expect-to-match  "<expected regexp to match>")

(ob-test  "<preamble+block>"
  :expect-to-not-match  "<expected-regexp to not match>")

IMHO, they would be easier to read with one additional line feed

  (ob-test  "
#+begin_src ...

#+end_src"
            :expect  "<expected-result>")

rather than

   (ob-test  "#+begin_src ...

#+end_src"
             :expect  "<expected-result>")

Similar macro/function exists in
ob-emacs-lisp/dynamic-lexical-execute
or ob-sql/command-should-contain.

my 2¢,
Phil