On Thursday 15 February 2007, Ovid wrote:
> --- Shlomi Fish <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Replying to myself I'd like to note that from my analysis at least
> > the
> > bignum test failed because of the following code in the new
> > TAPx::Parser:
> >
> > <<<<<<<<<
> > sub is_ok {
> > my $self = shift;
> >
> > return if $self->is_unplanned; # <-----------
> >
> > # TODO directives reverse the sense of a test.
> > return $self->has_todo ? 1 : $self->ok !~ /not/;
> > }
>
> This does appear to be a bug.
> I know how it came about and I'm looking
> at how to get around it.
OK, thanks.
> Thanks for the heads up.
>
You're welcome. Of course, this is only the cause for the first failure of the
Test::Run tests. There may be more regressions in TAPx::Parser that the other
failures in Test::Run. You may wish to see that everything passes while
you're at the neighbourhood.
Regards,
Shlomi Fish
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Shlomi Fish [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Homepage: http://www.shlomifish.org/
Chuck Norris wrote a complete Perl 6 implementation in a day but then
destroyed all evidence with his bare hands, so no one will know his secrets.
