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/

Reply via email to