On Tuesday 18 July 2006 17:28, Jonathan Rockway wrote:
> If you really don't want to have test names, you can specify undef. But
> making them "required" (as in "before everything else") makes the API
> easier to use for people who are doing things right (i.e. naming their
> tests).
That's begging the question!
> This setup is better than what Test::More does right now, since can_ok
> could now accept a test name.
What's unclear about:
can_ok( $some_invocant, 'some_method' );
... that is clearer with:
can_ok( $some_invocant, 'some_method',
name => q|$some_invocant->can( 'some_method' )| );
(My mind idly wonders if it were possible to generate this test description...
somehow... somewhere....)
-- c
