* On Fri, May 02 2008, Eirik Berg Hanssen wrote:
> nadim khemir <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>> On Friday 02 May 2008 01.24.00 Eirik Berg Hanssen wrote:
>>> use Test::More tests => 1;
>>> use Test::Trap;
>>> trap { warn "1\n2\n3" };
>>> $trap->warn_like(0, qr/1\n2\n3/);
>>
>> Ah! I like this. How did I miss this module??
>
> Perhaps I just haven't been _quite_ shameless enough plugging it? ;-)
>
>> is it possible to have trap{} return an object/sub/whatever that is created
>> by
>> the trap{}. The automagic $trap is too automagic for me.
>
> Possible? Sure, if you wrap it up for that. This is pure Perl,
> after all. :)
>
> Recommended? Not really. It kinda runs counter to the design. The
> idea was for trap{}/$trap to mimic eval{}/$@; for one thing
> list/scalar/void context is propagated into the block; for another,
> $trap is a (package, but still) global, so you may localize it.
>
> It seems to me any alternative interface will be either overly,
> un-perly verbose or else severely restricted. But, granted, the
> severely restricted interface may be enough for you.
I think the most sane interface would be:
my $trap = trap { ... };
is $trap->foo, 'foo';
is $trap->bar, 'bar';
You said you're trying to emulate $@, but $@ can be changed out from
under you rather easily, so instead of:
eval { foo() };
if($@){ error }
The defensive programmer will write:
my $result = eval { foo() };
if(!defined $result){ error } # use $@ for more details, if necessary.
This gives you more flexibility anyway:
my $a = eval { try_something };
my $b = eval { try_something_else };
if(!$a && !$b){ die 'both alternatives failed!' }
Anyway, automatically setting variables should always be avoided,
regardless of whether or not it is "perlish". I want correct tests, not
"perlish" tests.
Regards,
Jonathan Rockway
--
print just => another => perl => hacker => if $,=$"
