On 11/03/07, Michael G Schwern <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Fergal Daly wrote:
> Did group 1 produce 2 tests and group 2 produce 3 or was it the other
> way around?
Why is that important to know?
Because the first case conforms to the plan, the second doesn't.
> Worse,
>
> ok 1
> ok 2
> ok 3
> ...
> ok 1001
> 1..1000
>
> where did my extra test come from?
That's something the TAP producer can tell us, right now. No TAP extension
necessary. Its even better than relying on TAP groups because it will work
in any test, it doesn't rely on your having small groups.
I'll address this point replying to your other mail as it includes an example.
F
TB patch welcome.
> Finally, this allows you to fork a process to run a block with no
> prior knowledge of how many tests are going to happen inside the
> forked process, not a killer app but it might be useful for people who
> have tests involving lots of network latency, they could run in
> parallel.
I see, with the groups being independent of each other in ordering now.
That is handy.
