"Christian Lemburg" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> >> I was poking around on CPAN and noticed this rather complete
> >> alternative to Pod::Tests for embedding tests in code, a bit closer to
> >> what Barrie was discussing.
> >>
> >> I've invited the author onto the list and hopefully he'll say a few
> >> words. I'd also like people to poke around with it, see what its all
> >> about.
>
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> > I've been playing with the Test::Unit::TestCase framework and it's
> > potentially very cool, and nicely designed at the macro level.
> > However, there's some nastiness in the code itself which could be an
> > awful lot more perlish. The fact that the test suite that comes with
> > it doesn't actually test the whole system very well is kind of
> > annoying too.
>
> I agree. You are invited! Join the PerlUnit folks on sourceforge.
> Sorry for not testing everything. We are working on that.
> (Hope you did not play with version 0.12 ... :-( ...).
Hmm... the one I've got here is 0.11. Is that worse or better?
>
> > The documentation is kind of sucky too. It points you at the JUnit
> > documentation, then proceeds to do some stuff that JUnit doesn't do...
>
> Well, you have to strike a balance somewhere. And nobody seemed
> to like writing documentation, anyway. Maybe we have more, soon.
>
> I agree that on the whole, the framework is not very "perlish".
> But I don't know if this is a big problem compared to the gain
> that you have reusing the XUnit framework.
Don't get me wrong, I like the approach of the framework especially
its attempts at Doing What I Mean. But I do think it could have more
of the Perl nature without losing the advantages of the XUnit
framework.
--
Piers
