sorry, I misremembered the tool. there's one that serves your purpose, however I do not remember the name at this time.

I'm curious whether you had in mind any kind of benchmarks (which have not been implemented) for checking size and/or performance differences...

For E4VM I engineered it so that my Huffman-compressed BEAM bytecode would be much smaller, at some reasonable performance cost. Something like 1:3..1:6 ratio, probably even better. The emulator code was also planned to be very limited, possibly the language will also become a subset of Erlang, to cut on the features. But there were no numbers, there was no definite goal how small I want it to be. Such talks begin when there is a project or a customer and a target to reach.

For ErlangRT the original idea was to reproduce some subset of existing Erlang/OTP emulator features and then optimize from there. It resembles Erlang/OTP data formats and data structures, so it would begin at 1:1 ratio or maybe a little worse like 1.1:1 or something because Rust incurs some costs for compound types where for C it was enough to have an integer.

> Insomnia doesn't even come close to Paw due to the amount of features Paw has that Insomnia doesn't.

Can you list some of the important for you features that Insomnia lacks? (I'm not affiliated w/ Insomnia however I'm curious what makes Paw stand out to you.)

The big one for me is requests chaining, which I see they added. It's very cumbersome compared to Paw, though.

thanks for the nice write up

[nit] Token Management

It does not seem to build with the stable Rust.

  $ git clone ...
  $ cd theca
  $ cargo build
  ...
  errors
  ...

edit: formatting

For those curious (like me): meson's home page -- http://mesonbuild.com/

It's a bit funny: Standard plan ($8.50 per month if paid annualy is $102) while the credit is $100 (which gives 10 months nonetheless) :)

Edit: as the other comment said, it's $8.50/per user/per month... and event though comment https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11118413 says " Good point, we've removed that line. Thanks for your feedback!" (which is great!), it seems to be there (after a hard re-load).

Could you please provide links [to DigiKey]?

Digikey has a pretty good web site for search, start with ARM M0+ and then select for what you want. I picked the 3x3MM QFN package as a selector and got a number of Kinesis parts, here is one that in 100 unit quantities is .50 each. In 10K I'm sure that is under 40 cents. http://www.digikey.com/product-detail/en/MKL03Z8VFG4/MKL03Z8...

This particular part 8K flash and 2K RAM. Now the M0+ is better for these low end parts because it has the Thumb instruction set which gives it better code density than the original M0

Thank you, will do :)

I remember on one of the Erlang User Conferences there was an [impressive] presentation of testing C code with an erlang "driver".

It seems to provide random data generation only.

I'd say _the_ feature of QuickCheck is minimisation of the counter example.

Yep. This is why I wrote Hypothesis: http://hypothesis.readthedocs.org/ / https://pypi.python.org/pypi/hypothesis

It's a lot more fully featured than the alternatives. It still lacks a few features of quickcheck (coarbitrary for function generation, labelling of examples), but it does example minimization and a whole bunch of things even quickcheck doesn't.

Hypothesis looks fantastic. A friend of mine and me spent a while on Google collecting Python QC implementations but didn't find any that implemented shrinking.

Hypothesis escaped our search. I don't know how but the project could do with better Google ranking :)

It has some really useful features like storing the counterexamples.

The CLA is a bit odd but I'm sure you have good reasons!

Yeah, the google ranking of Hypothesis when you search for python quickcheck is a thing that's been bugging me. There's a blog post from 2013 about it on the front page but none of the various places the project exists appear. I'm not sure what to do about it. I'm planning to do a bunch of shopping around and promoting of the library when the 1.0 release happpens (probably next week), so hopefully that should help.

The CLA is for a mix of weird personal reasons around open source and cynically practical ones. Hypothesis is 100% always going to remain free, but I'm trying to figure out ways that I can make money out of working on it (I've put a ton of work into it, so it would be a shame not to) and that's a lot easier if I retain the copyright. I may decide it's not useful and drop it later, but it's a lot easier to have it now and drop it later than it is to try and retroactively get one if it turns out I need it.

Realised I should have linked to http://hypothesis.readthedocs.org/en/master/internals.html to back up that "a whole bunch of things even quickcheck doesn't" claim. :-)

Thank you for bringing it in: I've been looking for a pure Python analogue of QuickCheck.