Umm, let's not go overboard. The t/TEST script says
# This is written in a peculiar style, since we're trying to avoid
# most of the constructs we'll be testing for.
and the same obviously applies to some of the t/*/*.t tests.
I'm sure Larry would have found getting perl5 off the ground harder had
he needed to get more of it working before t/base/if.t (etc) could be run.
Probably best to leave at least t/base/* and t/cmd/* alone.
Tim.
On Tue, Aug 28, 2001 at 07:06:18AM -0400, Michael G Schwern wrote:
> I just updated the perlhack man page to include this:
>
> t/op/pack.t has a sensible ok() function, but if it didn't
> we could write one easily.
>
> my $test = 1;
> sub ok {
> my($ok) = @_;
>
> my $out = '';
> $out = "not " unless $ok;
> $out .= "ok $test\n";
>
> $test++;
> return $ok;
> }
>
> so instead of this:
>
> print 'not ' unless "1.20.300.4000" eq sprintf "%vd", pack("U*",1,20,300,4000);
> print "ok $test\n"; $test++;
>
> we can write the (somewhat) more sensible:
>
> ok( "1.20.300.4000" eq sprintf "%vd", pack("U*",1,20,300,4000) );
>
>
> Unfortunately, most of the perl test suite still does the ugly "print
> 'not '...". So if you've got nothing to do for 5 or 10 minutes, grab
> a test program at random from bleadperl, see if it does the "print"
> thing, throw in an ok() function, convert its tests and send the patch
> to perl-qa. I'll give it a look over to make sure it's okay and send
> it on to p5p.
>
> Once we've got the suite using an ok() function, it's much easier to
> switch selected tests over to Test::Simple/More.
>
>
> PS See the perlhack man page about getting a copy of bleadperl
> (perl-current).
>
> --
>
> Michael G. Schwern <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://www.pobox.com/~schwern/
> Perl6 Quality Assurance <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Kwalitee Is Job One
> Carpe canem! Seize the dog! This cannot be right.
> -- The Critic
