On 7/31/07, Andy Armstrong <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Can anyone think of anything wrong with the approach of replacing > require with an instrumented version? If the consensus is that that's > a sensible approach I'll play with tidying up the code.
This is the approach I thought of. I think you'll need to keep a persistent file of output to capture require calls across each test file and then summarize. (I.e. so you can set it as a command line option to the harness.) Regards, David
