* Michael G Schwern <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2008-03-31 08:00]: > Aristotle Pagaltzis wrote: >> What it protects you from is dying half-way through the tests >> without the harness noticing. Of course, that’s by far the >> most common failure mode. > > I don't want to drag out the "plan vs no_plan" argument, but I > do want to clear up this common misconception. > > Death is noted by both Test::More and Test::Harness and has > been for a long time. Recent versions of Test::More close off a > bug that caused death or non-zero exit codes to be lost in > certain cases. If you continue to experience that, report it. > It is a bug. > > The only way you can abort the test halfway through using > no_plan and get a success is with an exit(0). That scenario is > extremely rare, but I've considered adding in an exit() > override to detect it.
Except that the test program might be running at the other end of an HTTP connection. Or at the other end of a serial port. Or the harness might be parsing an archived TAP stream. Or a TAP archive generated offline in batch mode. Or… Regards, -- Aristotle Pagaltzis // <http://plasmasturm.org/>
