On Tue, Oct 02, 2001 at 10:49:03PM +0200, Tels wrote: > On 02-Oct-01 Michael G Schwern tried to scribble about: > > On Tue, Oct 02, 2001 at 04:34:34PM -0400, Michael G Schwern wrote: > >> Running tests for ExtUtils::MakeMaker > >> t/ExtUtils....ok > >> All tests successful. > >> Files=1, Tests=27, 7 wallclock secs ( 5.93 cusr + 1.15 csys = > >> 7.08 CPU) > > > > Come to think of it, does anyone find that benchmarking information > > particularly useful either? > > Me. It doesn't hurt,
Well, it does. It's more junk that obscures the true purpose, which is reporting the success or failure of the test. > and enabling it everytime you need it sounds like pain. If you want it, you can just keep TEST_HARNESS_BENCH environment variable enabled or something. How often do you really need it? -- Michael G. Schwern <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://www.pobox.com/~schwern/ Perl6 Quality Assurance <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Kwalitee Is Job One "Let's face it," said bearded Rusty Simmons, opening a can after the race. "This is a good excuse to drink some beer." At 10:30 in the morning? "Well, it's past noon in Dublin," said teammate Mike [Joseph] Schwern. "It's our duty." -- "Sure, and It's a Great Day for Irish Runners" Newsday, Sunday, March 20, 1988
