On 19 Mar 2007, at 02:05, A. Pagaltzis wrote:
Hmm, I never got a subscription confirmation request.
Check the pending subscriber list, I should be in there.
I've just manually subscribed you.
--
Andy Armstrong, hexten.net
On Sun, Mar 18, 2007 at 01:06:48AM +, Andy Armstrong wrote:
And in fact now I see how simple the proposal is I realise that even
mentioning how it might be implemented is completely unnecessary.
Sorry folks - it's been a long day :)
Well then, you should spend less time working
Andy Armstrong wrote:
On 18 Mar 2007, at 01:19, Michael G Schwern wrote:
[snip]
In the TAP stream the association between a block of YAML and a
particular
test could be made explicit by putting the test number in the block.
not ok 5
---
test: 5
got: 23
On Sun, Mar 18, 2007 at 01:37:36AM +, Andy Armstrong wrote:
Are we expecting a YAML reader / writer to be core anytime soon?
Not that I'm aware of.
Nicholas Clark
Ovid wrote:
Which brings me to my next point: we appear to have no attracted any
people from other programming communities to the discussion about the
next version of TAP, but I hear that some are using TAP::Parser any
way.Does anyone know of groups that are *regularly* using the
Ovid wrote:
Amusingly, when I was at last year's Google Test Automation Conference,
lots of folks were talking about their XML output from their test
harnesses and many of them weren't happy with it (having to wait for a
well-formed XML document sucks, particularly when a human can read the
On Sunday 18 March 2007, Michael G Schwern wrote:
Ovid wrote:
Amusingly, when I was at last year's Google Test Automation Conference,
lots of folks were talking about their XML output from their test
harnesses and many of them weren't happy with it (having to wait for a
well-formed XML
On 18 Mar 2007, at 21:12, Michael G Schwern wrote:
Another problem is we're not even on most people's maps. Here's
one example.
http://opensourcetesting.org
Might it be time we start up a TAP-only mailing list? If nothing
else it
would unclog perl-qa from those who want to talk about
* Andy Armstrong [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2007-03-18 22:45]:
I volunteer to host it if necessary.
That’s not a bad idea; a dedicated domain for TAP without any
mention of Perl in the name is probably a good marketing move.
I don’t mean that we need to ashamedly hide the fact that we’re
Perlers, but I
* A. Pagaltzis [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2007-03-18 23:43]:
* Andy Armstrong [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2007-03-18 22:45]:
I volunteer to host it if necessary.
That’s not a bad idea; a dedicated domain for TAP without any
mention of Perl in the name is probably a good marketing move.
I don’t mean that we
A. Pagaltzis wrote:
* A. Pagaltzis [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2007-03-18 23:43]:
* Andy Armstrong [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2007-03-18 22:45]:
I volunteer to host it if necessary.
That’s not a bad idea; a dedicated domain for TAP without any
mention of Perl in the name is probably a good marketing move.
I
Andy Armstrong wrote:
On 18 Mar 2007, at 21:12, Michael G Schwern wrote:
Another problem is we're not even on most people's maps. Here's one
example.
http://opensourcetesting.org
Might it be time we start up a TAP-only mailing list? If nothing else it
would unclog perl-qa from those who
* Michael G Schwern [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2007-03-18 22:10]:
Andy Armstrong wrote:
There's a lot of wisdom in Ghostbusters of which this is just
one example.
uhhh... oh.
ROTFL! Exactly my reaction.
Regards,
--
Aristotle Pagaltzis // http://plasmasturm.org/
A. Pagaltzis wrote:
What did you intend to gain by merging the TAP::Parser list
into the TAP list?
Well, as long as the discussions about TAP remain firmly on the
TAP list, that might be OK. If the TAP::Parser list deals purely
with implementation details that are truly irrelevant to TAP
* Andy Armstrong [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2007-03-19 00:35]:
On 18 Mar 2007, at 23:10, A. Pagaltzis wrote:
* Andy Armstrong [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2007-03-19 00:05]:
http://testanything.org/pipermail/tap-l/
Subscribed!
Can't see you on the subscribers list. Did it not work?
Hmm, I never got a
Some other ideas I saw in a real system:
- distinguish between failures in the configuration of the system under test
and the actual tes
this would yield levels such as conf_error and conf_warning
- In addition I am not sure if some of these calls should automatically bail out
as being fatal
In article [EMAIL PROTECTED], Michael G Schwern
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
A. Pagaltzis wrote:
The most bangs I can count instantly by looking at them is four.
For five bangs and up, all I see is âlots of bangs.â I have to
count character by character to tell them apart. Visually,
I
On 17 Mar 2007, at 17:36, brian d foy wrote:
if you're going to use a different starting character for these
messages, how about a [ ? Follow the start of the string by a real
word:
not ok 1
[fail] Failed test in foo.t line 2
ok 2
[fatal] WHOA! The fabric of the universe just broke
Andy Armstrong wrote:
I'm still not clear what this notation provides that we can't do with
the new YAML machine readable diagnostic syntax. What are the supposed
benefits? Concision?
Yeah, brevity. Pretty much. And human readability. YAML is pretty good and
all but some text prefixed with
brian d foy wrote:
if you're going to use a different starting character for these
messages, how about a [ ? Follow the start of the string by a real
word:
not ok 1
[fail] Failed test in foo.t line 2
ok 2
[fatal] WHOA! The fabric of the universe just broke down!
[damn it,
* Michael G Schwern [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2007-03-18 00:55]:
How about [*label*] or even just **label**?
We could even say, for brevity, that no label == notice.
not ok 1
**fail** Failed test in foo.t line 2
ok 2
**pass** Some information
ok 3
We're going to connect to the Internet
Andy Armstrong wrote:
( I'm going to be calling the YAML diagnostic syntax YAMLish and I
reckon this proposal should be called bang+ :)
I'm calling it the logging proposal for lack of anything better. The bangs
are now gone.
Yeah, brevity. Pretty much. And human readability. YAML is
On 18 Mar 2007, at 00:36, Michael G Schwern wrote:
OK, well it wouldn't be too hard to modify the YAMLish reader /
writer
to handle this syntax too.
You mentioned that one wiki, too, and it confused me. What does
the YAML
reader have to do with the bang syntax? Are you proposing
On 18 Mar 2007, at 01:03, Andy Armstrong wrote:
No - just expressing myself badly. What I meant was more like 'we
could plug this syntax in in the same way that we do the YAMLish
reader / writer'.
And in fact now I see how simple the proposal is I realise that even
mentioning how it might
Michael G Schwern wrote:
How about
diag Failure\n. Or even levels of keywords debug/info/notice/warning/
err/crit/alert/emerg (stolen from syslog.h).
That's an interesting idea. My worry is making it human readable.
not ok 2
err Test failed in foo.t line 2
err got: foo
err
On 16 Mar 2007, at 07:53, Michael G Schwern wrote:
[snip]
I don't know if we need all 8 levels used in syslog. I'm not sure
where the
distinction comes between Emergency, Alert, Critical and
Error when it
comes to testing. But its a good start. Some undefined levels we
can define
Adrian Howard wrote:
Maybe use the levels from Log4J, Log::Log4perl, et al?
fatal
error
warn
info
debug
Ok, maybe take that and tailor it more to testing. Here it is in order of
severity. The recommended display level would be warn.
fatal !!!
There's an error in the TAP producer
* Michael G Schwern [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2007-03-16 11:55]:
fatal !!!
fail !!
warn !
notice
pass !!!
info !!
debug !
The most bangs I can count instantly by looking at them is four.
For five bangs and up, all I see is “lots of bangs.” I have to
count
A. Pagaltzis wrote:
The most bangs I can count instantly by looking at them is four.
For five bangs and up, all I see is “lots of bangs.” I have to
count character by character to tell them apart. Visually,
I can’t distinguish `fatal` from `fail` at all. Another problem
is that I’d never
* Michael G Schwern [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2007-03-17 01:35]:
Its really not clear what levels !?, ?, X!!X and @ would mean,
or even that they're log messages, without looking it up.
I suppose that’s true, although that situation is not really
different from the bangs.
* Michael G Schwern [EMAIL
I believe I now know how to move towards no longer using STDERR for failure
information display AND keep compatibility with existing test scripts, even
those not written using Test::Builder or Test.pm AND not require
Test::Builder, Test.pm and TH not be upgraded in lock step AND not introduce
Michael G Schwern wrote:
print TAP version 15\n;
print 1..1\n;
print # Information\n;
print not ok 1\n;
print ! Failure\n;
I'd really not like to see meaningful punctuation. How about
diag Failure\n. Or even levels of keywords debug/info/notice/warning/
Yitzchak Scott-Thoennes wrote:
Michael G Schwern wrote:
print TAP version 15\n;
print 1..1\n;
print # Information\n;
print not ok 1\n;
print ! Failure\n;
I'd really not like to see meaningful punctuation.
I'm going to say its if a line starts with a ! just for
33 matches
Mail list logo
