On 30 Nov 2007, at 07:49, chromatic wrote:
I don't believe producer (Test::Builder) and consumer (Test::Harness)
are necessarily entirely alike or symmetrical in this regard. T::B
pushes and T::H pulls - which makes callbacks or some higher level
event driven interface more appropriate for T::H than it would be for
T::B. Many extensions to T::H will be observing passing tests or
providing UI wrappers. T::B on the other hand is a multiplexer for a
variety of inputs.
The situation isn't as different as it sounds. There are at least
three ways
in which people might want to customize prove:
What does "customize prove" look like? Loading modules into the prove
tool that alter its behaviour? Writing their own prove-alikes?
* the way it causes other things to produce TAP
* the way it analyzes parsed TAP
* the way it displays the results
For some reason I think of event-driven filters. Then again, it is
almost
midnight local time.
Indeed. Which you probably wouldn't consider for Test::Builder. Which
was the nub of my gist. T::B allows many talkers and edits the results
into a coherent monologue. T::H / prove must allow many listeners to
collaborate to produce an interpretation of that monologue.
--
Andy Armstrong, Hexten
