----- Original Message ----
> From: David E. Wheeler <da...@kineticode.com>
> To: Andy Lester <a...@petdance.com>
> Cc: Michael G Schwern <schw...@pobox.com>; Eric Wilhelm
> <scratchcomput...@gmail.com>; perl-qa@perl.org
> Sent: Friday, 23 January, 2009 6:16:25
> Subject: Re: Let us stop rehashing plans
>
> On Jan 22, 2009, at 10:02 PM, Andy Lester wrote:
>
> > On Jan 22, 2009, at 11:23 PM, David E. Wheeler wrote:
> >
> >> people see Perl 6 as an opportunity to rethink things.
> >
> > Except that Perl 6 isn't changing TAP.
>
> No, but there really wasn't any talk about changing TAP in that thread. It
> was
> implied, but only when you started to think about that Eric wanted to do.
Well, since the thread was about Eric's method of eliminating 'plan', after you
made your explanation, I think it was clear that the proposal would require, as
Eric suggested, an alteration to core TAP:
ok 1
ok 2
ok 1
ok 2
ok 3
ok 4
1..4
ok 3
1..3
With the above, the nested TAP is essentially a 'no_plan' stream which is
summarized as 'ok 3'. I *think* this is what Eric was referring to. This
does, to an extent, merely push the plan/no_plan issue down a level (how do I
know that 4 tests in the nested TAP were the tests which needed to be run?),
but it's an interesting idea. (I deliberately included plans to show how the
idea could still match our current TAP discussion and not be too far "out
there").
Cheers,
Ovid
--
Buy the book - http://www.oreilly.com/catalog/perlhks/
Tech blog - http://use.perl.org/~Ovid/journal/
Twitter - http://twitter.com/OvidPerl
Official Perl 6 Wiki - http://www.perlfoundation.org/perl6
