You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
Currently I see one drawback to the current function to test html: it will not handle encoding correctly because of readLines. Should not be a wide issue but could happen in some edge cases.
It made me think about testthat::expect_known_output. I think it could be useful : it writes result to file and compare then compare following test with this file. It seems like what you want to do.
I find it useful that the file is written at first test is not existing yet. You could update easily and I think it handles encoding by ensuring UTF8 for the written file. No need to write manually the comparison file.
Just an idea for improvement.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Related to feature added in #32
Currently I see one drawback to the current function to test html: it will not handle encoding correctly because of readLines. Should not be a wide issue but could happen in some edge cases.
It made me think about
testthat::expect_known_output. I think it could be useful : it writes result to file and compare then compare following test with this file. It seems like what you want to do.I find it useful that the file is written at first test is not existing yet. You could update easily and I think it handles encoding by ensuring UTF8 for the written file. No need to write manually the comparison file.
Just an idea for improvement.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: