Greg Sabino Mullane wrote: > Michael G Schwern asks: > >> What's wrong with no_plan? Why go through backflips to >> automate counting the tests when you can just not count >> them? Seems needlessly officious. > > I seldom run the whole test suite at once, but only parts I care about > at the moment, so it's nice to have Test::More tell me that 18/64 tests > failed. It's also nice to see how far along we are with a running tally, > when I check back in on the running tests.
How do you accomplish that? Why do you do that? That you have to "check back" indicates that an individual test file takes a long time to run. The desire to run only some of the tests in a file is usually a red flag that there's too many tests in each file. Could you simply break the test up into individual files that you could then run individually? >> * count_tests() is not a method, it's a function. It should either >> be a class method or just export it > > True enough: I'll probably just export it, although it's a fairly > generic name. count_tests() counts the tests. Seems a pretty good name to me. Remember, you can always stop a default export. >> * Why does count_tests() take a reference? A hash will >> do perfectly well. > > You mean passing in the raw keys and values? Ick. Don't say "ick", say why. Don't feel, think. [1] Does it just *feel* wrong or do you know why it actually *is* wrong? >> * Lord I hate tabs. > > Not touching that one. Instead, I'll just go on editing my BSD-licensed, > git controlled, Postgres application with tabs, using emacs on my Linux > KDE laptop, pausing to play a game on my PlayStation. :) Well, if it's a Playstation 2 you're forgiven. :P [1] The anti-Yoda am I. -- I have a date with some giant cartoon robots and booze.
