Lwt sequence tests 2

[cedlemo]

#406

@aantron ,

I have a coverage of 99.3%, it just remains the Lwt_sequence.length last branch that is not visited. I can make a PR to delete this branch in it if you want.

Don't merge this one now, I want to change the filled_sequence content with something better than -3,-2,-1,1,2,3 -> 1,2,3,4,5,6. Do you have some requests in order to improve the tests ?

I saw that you use a lot of begin ... end while I use (...), which one is better ? (readability or other reason)

[aantron]

Do you have some requests in order to improve the tests ?

No, I think the tests are pretty much fine :)

it just remains the Lwt_sequence.length last branch that is not visited. I can make a PR to delete this branch in it if you want.

Please :)

I saw that you use a lot of begin ... end while I use (...), which one is better ? (readability or other reason)

I usually use (...) for single-line expressions, and begin ... end for complex, multi-line expressions.

The reason is because for a complex expression, if using only (...), it is likely to end up with ))))) at the end, which is both difficult to read and annoying in diffs. The next alternative is

blahblah (
  ...
) (* <------ argh *)

but as you can see by my comment, I think this is really ugly :p I think if you have to put a parenthesis on its own line to avoid ))))), it is time to switch to begin ... end.

[cedlemo]

@aantron, rebase done and ready to be merged.

[aantron]

Thank you!