On Fri, 14 Dec 2001 00:35:35 -0500 Michael G Schwern <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Well, why not globally overrides Test::More's is, is_deeply etc? > > You change the semantics of is() by doing that, potentially causing > confusion. Changing the semantics is your responsibility. So it should be safe when forced via optional arguments of use(). > $a = [qw(a b c)]; > $b = [qw(a b c)]; > is( $a, $b ); > > In Test::More, that test fails. If you replace it eq_or_diff() it > passes. Maybe eq_or_diff_text(). > is_deeply() could probably be replaced, though. However, I > don't see much benefit. IMHO Test::Differences' benefit is its mix-in nature. Changing each is_deeply() to eq_or_diff_data() hand by hand "if not ok" seems a little hassle to me. -- Tatsuhiko Miyagawa Livin' On The EDGE, Co.,Ltd. mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.edge.co.jp/
