MoonBit Extract Spec & Test
Overview
Reverse-engineer a formal API contract (<pkg>_spec.mbt) and comprehensive test suites from an existing MoonBit implementation. This enables spec-driven testing for already-written code.
When to Use
- User asks to "extract spec from existing implementation"
- User wants to "generate spec-driven tests for a package"
- User requests "create formal API specification from code"
- Converting legacy code to spec-driven development workflow
- Need to document and test existing public API surface
Workflow
1. Analyze the Existing Implementation
Identify public API surface:
- List all
pubandpub(all)types, functions, traits - Note error types (suberrors) and their variants
- Document method signatures and trait implementations
- Identify key entry points and core functionality
Examine test patterns (if tests exist):
- Look for existing test files (
*_test.mbt,*_wbtest.mbt) - Identify test coverage gaps
- Note common test scenarios
2. Generate the Spec File (<pkg>_spec.mbt)
Create formal API contract:
- Use the
declarekeyword for all public functions/types - Preserve exact type signatures from implementation
- Include error types with
derive(Show, Eq, ToJson)for testability - Add documentation comments from original code
- Declarations with
declaredo not have a body - Use
pub(all)for types that need construction in tests - Keep
pubfor opaque types
Example spec structure:
///|
/// Error type for parsing operations
pub(all) suberror ParseError {
InvalidFormat(String)
UnexpectedEof
} derive(Show, Eq, ToJson)
///|
/// Main data type
declare pub(all) type Toml
///|
/// Convert to test JSON format
declare pub fn Toml::to_test_json(self : Toml) -> Json
///|
/// Parse TOML from string
declare pub fn parse(input : StringView) -> Result[Toml, ParseError]
3. Extract and Organize Test Cases
Categorize tests by validity (happy path vs error path):
Valid tests (<pkg>_valid_test.mbt):
- Happy path: valid inputs that exercise core features
- Edge cases: boundary sizes, empty inputs, maximum nesting
- Compatibility: behaviors that match real-world data or dominant implementations
- Regression: bugs fixed in prior work or known pitfalls
Invalid tests (<pkg>_invalid_test.mbt):
- Error path: invalid inputs and required error behavior
- Ambiguities: inputs where the spec allows multiple interpretations (tests pin down chosen interpretation)
- Malformed inputs: syntax errors, type mismatches, constraint violations
4. Write Spec-Driven Tests
For valid input tests:
///|
test "valid/category/test-name" {
let toml_text =
#|key = "value"
#|
let toml = match @pkg.parse(toml_text) {
Ok(toml) => toml
Err(error) => fail("Failed to parse: " + error.to_string())
}
json_inspect(toml.to_test_json(), content={
"key": { "type": "string", "value": "value" }
})
}
For invalid input tests:
///|
test "invalid/category/test-name" {
let toml_text =
#|invalid syntax here
#|
match @pkg.parse(toml_text) {
Ok(toml) => {
let json = toml.to_test_json()
fail("Expected parse to fail, got \{json.stringify(indent=2)}")
}
Err(_) => ()
}
}
5. Validate
Type-check the spec:
moon check
Run the tests:
moon test # Run all tests
moon test -u # Update snapshot tests
Verify coverage:
- Ensure all public API functions have tests
- Check for untested error paths
- Confirm edge cases are covered
Key Principles
Spec File Rules
- Declaration-only stubs: All public API uses
declarekeyword (no body needed) - Exact signatures: Match the implementation's type signatures precisely
- Error handling: Include all error types with proper derives
- Documentation: Preserve or add doc comments for clarity
- Test helpers: Include conversion functions like
to_test_json()for inspection
Test Organization
- Black-box testing: Tests use only public API (call via
@pkg.function) - Snapshot testing: Prefer
json_inspect()for complex values - Clear naming: Use descriptive test names like "valid/arrays/nested" or "invalid/keys/empty"
- Categorization: Organize by validity (
<pkg>_valid_test.mbtfor happy path,<pkg>_invalid_test.mbtfor error path) - Block separation: Use
///|to delimit test blocks
Test Coverage Goals
- Positive cases: Valid inputs producing expected outputs
- Negative cases: Invalid inputs producing appropriate errors
- Edge cases: Boundaries, empty inputs, special values
- Integration: Features working together
- Aim for 80-90% API coverage
Example Extraction
From Implementation
pub type Config
pub fn Config::parse(text : String) -> Result[Config, String] {
// implementation
}
pub fn Config::get_value(self : Config, key : String) -> String? {
// implementation
}
To Spec
///|
declare pub type Config
///|
declare pub fn Config::parse(text : String) -> Result[Config, String]
///|
declare pub fn Config::get_value(self : Config, key : String) -> String?
To Tests
///|
test "parse valid config" {
let result = try? Config::parse("key=value")
match result {
Ok(cfg) => {
inspect(cfg.get_value("key"), content="Some(\"value\")")
}
Err(e) => fail("Parse failed: \{e}")
}
}
///|
test "parse invalid config returns error" {
let result = try? Config::parse("invalid")
match result {
Ok(_) => fail("Should have failed to parse")
Err(_) => ()
}
}
Tips
- Start simple: Begin with core functionality, add complexity incrementally
- Use existing tests: If tests exist, migrate and enhance them
- Iterate: Run
moon checkfrequently to catch type errors early - Update snapshots: Use
moon test -uwhen output format changes - Document reasoning: Add comments explaining non-obvious test cases
Common Patterns
Testing with Result types
let result : Result[T, Error] = try? function_call(...)
match result {
Ok(value) => inspect(value, content="...")
Err(e) => fail("Unexpected error: \{e}")
}
Testing expected failures
match try? function_call(...) {
Ok(v) => fail("Expected error, got \{v}")
Err(_) => () // Success - error was expected
}
Using test JSON format
json_inspect(value.to_test_json(), content={
"field": { "type": "integer", "value": "42" }
})