Re: [cgiapp] Testing harness for non-CGI::App code

2008-11-26 Thread Michael Peters
Ron Savage wrote: Is Test::WWW::Mechanize the most appropriate harness for testing CGI (but not CGI::Application) code? I love T::W::M (used with Test::HTML::Content). But why limit yourself to just normal CGI and not CGI::Application code? IMO it's not only important to test the C::A code,

Re: [cgiapp] Testing harness for non-CGI::App code

2008-11-26 Thread Ron Savage
Hi Michael On Wed, 2008-11-26 at 09:12 -0500, Michael Peters wrote: Ron Savage wrote: Is Test::WWW::Mechanize the most appropriate harness for testing CGI (but not CGI::Application) code? I love T::W::M (used with Test::HTML::Content). But why limit yourself to just normal CGI and not

[cgiapp] Testing harness for non-CGI::App code

2008-11-25 Thread Ron Savage
Hi Folks Is Test::WWW::Mechanize the most appropriate harness for testing CGI (but not CGI::Application) code? -- Ron Savage [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://savage.net.au/index.html # CGI::Application community mailing list ##