R help - Mar 2017 - Any reason not to use RUnit any longer?

Hello,

I see that quite some packages nowadays use testthat and that RUnit doesn't
have recent updates. On the other hand Rccp, fTrading and others (still)
test with RUnit.

My old code uses RUnit and I would prefer to keep it that way unless there
is an important reason to switch to testthat. If it makes a difference, I
do _not_ use roxygen and stay close to R-exts standards (ok, a testing
framework I'd like to have).

Thanks for any advise / opinions,

Hans-Peter

	[[alternative HTML version deleted]]

On 6 March 2017 at 19:04, Hans-Peter Suter wrote:
| I see that quite some packages nowadays use testthat and that RUnit
doesn't
| have recent updates. On the other hand Rccp, fTrading and others (still)
| test with RUnit.

RUnit is alive and well, look at

      https://cran.r-project.org/package=RUnit
      https://cran.r-project.org/web/checks/check_results_RUnit.html

which shows all its checks are clean.  It also has a new maintainer in Roman
Zenka (who too has code that uses it) so I would not be worried.
 
| My old code uses RUnit and I would prefer to keep it that way unless there
| is an important reason to switch to testthat. If it makes a difference, I
| do _not_ use roxygen and stay close to R-exts standards (ok, a testing
| framework I'd like to have).

There is no offically sanctioned package in WRE for this as far as I know.

If you run 'make check' on R itself, all the package in base R check via
.Rout.save files -- which makes sense as we want no / few external
dependencies at this level.

In short, you are free to use what you prefer.  I still use RUnit too.

Dirk

-- 
http://dirk.eddelbuettel.com | @eddelbuettel | edd at debian.org

Thanks a lot for the feedback, Dirk and Mehmet,

My (large) test-code is in RUnit and so I'm glad to hear that it is fine.
RUnit worked very well for me and I do not have a reason to switch.

	[[alternative HTML version deleted]]