--- On Thu, 21/8/08, chromatic <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > That part is the wad.
No, for the most part, it's a simple list of key/value pairs. > (You might find it amusing to note that the SOAP folks > didn't use the > sack/potato/wad metaphor when naming their failure.) SOAP has the problem that the acronym has nothing to do with the reality, so they started with a huge mess o' confusion to start with. For the most part, we're just looking for is taking the information that's ALREADY in diagnostics and making it machine readable. Remember, this is mostly just a list of key/value pairs :) > I wonder why anyone wants a test so complex that its > diagnostic requires you > to serialize and deserialize objects and/or nested data > structures to and > from custom TAP producers and consumers ... Testing in large scale environments has different needs than CPAN modules. People who don't work in those environments often don't see it. Remember the brouhaha over Module::Build? Many people said it was useless because EUMM does everything they need. Obviously, as consumers, their needs are different from authors and they didn't appreciate concerns in domains they don't experience. Remember, all of this is OPTIONAL. If you don't want it, don't use it. And don't forget to drop an email to Yahoo! telling them that their silly work with tagging TAP streams is over-engineering. > Me, I'll be over here, trying to make my tests > sufficiently easy to debug that > I don't have to worry about these things. Wish I had that luxury. Cheers, Ovid
