On 29 Sep 2001, Piers Cawley wrote:
> If it's not a dumb question, why are you doing it that way? If you
> were using PerlUnit, aka Test::Unit::TestCase, you could do something
> like:
Why am I doing what? Forking and starting tests at weird offsets?
The forking is cause I need to load different modules representing the
same interface each time. The starting at a different spot is so I can
track the number of tests over the whole run.
> package ParentTest;
>
> use base 'Test::Unit::TestCase';
>
> sub setup {
> ...
> }
>
>
> sub test_foo {
> ...
> }
I looked at Test::Unit at it was just too complicated for me back then.
The way I was doing it before was simply to use my own little ok() sub and
that was mostly good enough. Test::More is nice cause of all the
convenient functions like isa_ok. This has helped me improve and clarify
the test suite. But I don't see the need for even more functionality yet.
> Thinking about it, you could probably move the module loads into the
> test scripts and have them just run the basic test, which would, in
> turn, probably mean you could get away with just using Test::More/Simple
But I like Test::More! Its just the numbering issue that's the problem.
-dave
/*==================
www.urth.org
We await the New Sun
==================*/
