gleam dev idea

[lpil]

What do you think?

Rendered

[schurhammer]

gleam fix could rename test to dev if it contains Gleam code.

I think we better not do this.

1. It can break the project
2. Its very easy to do manually

Other than that, sounds good to me.

[strawmelonjuice]

Oh yes this makes that a lot clearer --must say the proposal cleared it up for me...--, if this is doable without considerable load I'd say this is a great idea?

[lpil]

That seems reasonable @schurhammer. It is easy for them to do, as you say.

[massivefermion]

Why get rid of test? I think test code is the most probable thing this directory is going to be used for, so it deserves a directory of its own. You can just make the compiler recognize the dev directory if it's there. Getting rid of the test directory in the project and constantly explaining to newcomers that the tests should be in the dev directory would be even more confusing than the problem this proposal is trying to solve!

[lpil]

It's not a problem in other mainstream ecosystems such as Java and JavaScript, so I don't think it would be a problem for Gleam.

[inoas-nbw]

We ran into this problem recently in elixir projects where we had test data that was required for testing the library integration by library consumers and put it into test... which was not shipped. If it had been named dev it would have been more clear and src/test would have been used or an elixir equivalent.