On 1 Feb 2007, at 16:28, Joshua ben Jore wrote: [snip]
There's is nothing special about what T::E is doing to detect errors - it just turns out the popular practice of looking at $@ is flawed. That's a problem with the pattern and I expect that what it means is that if T::E starts detecting errors that were previously being ignored that the user really ought to be fixing up their code because that's buggy as well.
I don't like labelling the change in behaviour an error. Sometimes it might be. Sometimes it might not. I'd like T::E to support both options. Especially since the errors can be in third party code that doesn't affect the behaviour of the code under test.
At this point I end up thinking it would be nice if there were another module out there that got all the error checking done correctly so T::E could use its implementation and so could user code.
That sounds sane. Adrian
