On Sun, Dec 16, 2001 at 07:30:37PM +0000, Nicholas Clark wrote: > > I just thought of a better way. Since all we're testing is that > > lib.pm does the right things to @INC, we can presume that if one of > > require(), do() or use() works, the rest will work. > > Can't we just test what @INC now contains by directly reading it? > I'm assuming that it's safe for the test to assume that do/require/use > work with @INC correctly.
Technically, yeah. But Brent's already gone that extra mile. -- Michael G. Schwern <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://www.pobox.com/~schwern/ Perl Quality Assurance <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Kwalitee Is Job One Any sufficiently encapsulated hack is no longer a hack.
