On 16 Mar 2009, at 23:52, Fergal Daly wrote:
2009/3/16 Michael G Schwern <schw...@pobox.com>:
[snip]
I hear where you're coming from, but there is some value in knowing
a test
still does what it did before. A regression test.
Consider the following:
my @things = $obj->things(3);
for my $thing (@things) {
is $thing, 42;
}
It's nice to know that things() still returns 3 items. Yes, there
should be a
test in there checking that @things == 3 but maybe there's not and
this is a
simple example.
This is exactly what a plan will catch and why it can't be automated.
As far as I can tell we're agreeing.
I don't think anybody is disagreeing here. Plans have advantages and
disadvantages. So do no-plans. The only folk I'll disagree with are
folk who say one or the other is universally better.
For my particular style of testing (mostly TDD, tending to write small
isolated tests, etc.) plans tend to get in my way much more than they
help. So I don't use them. Thank you TAP & T::B for letting me do
that :-)
Cheers,
Adrian
--
delicious.com/adrianh - twitter.com/adrianh - adri...@quietstars.com
