Adam Kennedy wrote:
Michael Graham wrote:
[...]
But I think a more useful measure of kwalitee would be a 20%-30%
coverage test.
Something like that sounds much more reasonable than a high number.
Of course, if you've seen the first third of the PPI talk you realise we
still have all the problems of having to use perl itself...
#!/usr/bin/perl
use Test::More 'no_plan';
use Suitcase::Nuke trigger_in_seconds => 1;
pass("Looks good");
oops, there goes the neighbourhood.
Collecting any sort of coverage data is a complete bitch. Let me just
say right now that doing it across _all_ of CPAN is flat out impossible.
It's impossible.
Quite. I believe the only way is for the author to do the Devel::Cover
dance and forward the results. It also distributes the workload out to
where it should be done.
Since it's an optional step that has no direct bearing on the
functionality of the module, it's a sign that the author takes care. In
fact, uploading any coverage statistics would already be a sign of quality.
David
--
"It's overkill of course, but you can never have too much overkill."
