On 1 Nov 2007, at 00:11, Eric Wilhelm wrote:
But what about a more general mechanism? A TAP directive that means
'schedule these other tests'. So then you'd have a controller test
which was the only one directly visible to Test::Harness and that'd
decide which other tests to run.
It sounds like it would be re-creating a lot of the same functionality
needed for declarative extra testing and/or Test::Manifest.
http://scratchcomputing.com/tmp/extra_testing.txt
I would rather it not be a TAP directive. Yes, it abstracts
the "manifesting" into TAP, but it still requires some code to run to
determine the manifest, and will therefore be less introspectable.
Yeah - I slept on it. It should be TSP - Test Steering Protocol. If a
test emits TAP it's a test, if it emits TSP it's a controller. TAP
should stay pure.
--
Andy Armstrong, Hexten
