On 1/21/07, David Golden <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 1/21/07, Andy Armstrong <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Of course, it also depends upon what
> > output information is being scraped. If it's only something simple
> > like 'All
> > tests successful', then this is an easier task.
>
> I presume anyone who wanted to know that currently would just be calling
> T::H::execute_tests which returns three hashes that summarise the test
> results.
This is a false assumption. You've got to consider that the
"canonical" way to run tests for a distribution is still "make test"
and thus Test::Harness is getting called from a command-line embedded
in a Makefile. The program calling "make test" (e.g. CPAN.pm) has no
way of getting structured data back from the function call -- it has
to have some sort of IPC. Thus my suggestion for dumping structured
output to text files.
I dont get this logic.
Why cant something that wants to monitor the test process do something
other than make test?
They can do a make, and or make test-prep or whatever, and then call
into an alternative test harness framework to monitor the tests.
Can you explain why this is a no-go in more detail?
Yves
--
perl -Mre=debug -e "/just|another|perl|hacker/"
