Tidy way to test and set when using test egg?

[Matt Welland]

I find myself doing stuff like this very often when writing tests using the test egg:

;; A trivial example where  the function under test is "-"

(define data #f)

(test #f 1 (let ((res (- 2 1)))(set! data res) res))

I'd really prefer to do something like:

(test-and-define data #f 1 (- 2 1))

But the closest I could get was:

(define-syntax test-and-set
  (syntax-rules ()
    ((_ name arg1 arg2 body ...)
     (test arg1 arg2
  (let ((res (begin body ...)))
    (set! name res)
    res
    )))))

So I can do:

(define data #f)

(test-and-set data #f 1 (- 2 1))

Questions:

1. Is there a generally better way to test and gather the result for use in downstream tests?

2. Is there a way to write a macro that can create the toplevel binding?

--

--

Complexity is your enemy. Any fool can make something complicated.

It is hard to keep things simple. - Richard Branson.