# from Fergal Daly
# on Friday 23 January 2009 10:18:
>sub test_foo {
> increment_plan_by(3);
> ok(foo(1), "foo1 test");
> ok(foo(2), "foo2 test");
> ok(foo(3), "foo3 test");
>}
>
>but you forget add an actual test_foo() call or due to some bug, the
>call is skipped. Your tests will happily complete and your plan will
>declare itself to be correct because it is too close to the tests.
This is true, but I'm equally likely to not adjust the static numeric
plan anyway.
It seems like this case suffers from its own definition. If we adjust
the construct such that the planning is implicit and calling is
guaranteed:
test_list [1,2,3] { ok(foo($_), "foo$_ test"; };
If you somehow didn't run that code, this is a different problem
entirely. If I'm having such a bad day that I failed to write the code
such that it actually executes, what says that I've managed to update
the plan correctly or at all?
--Eric
--
"I've often gotten the feeling that the only people who have learned
from computer assisted instruction are the authors."
--Ben Schneiderman
---------------------------------------------------
http://scratchcomputing.com
---------------------------------------------------
