# from Michael G Schwern
# on Sunday 30 October 2011 20:30:
>The current Test::Builder implementation is a mess and its design
> cannot go forward. They have to be gotten just right to ensure that
> not just nested TAP is supported, but nesting in other formats. Or
> if those formats don't have nesting, then linearizing the subtests in
> those formats. And event watcher (ie. plugins) authors have to be
> shielded from the complexity.
Maybe have a null or default handler for the subtests -- possibly
allowing authors to use a base class or role which gives them a
subtest_start() returning the null handler and subtest_end() which just
forwards the summary as a single test event.
Is there a second format being implemented to test this API?
>The end result is looking to be fairly simple, but that doesn't mean a
>lot of work didn't go into it.
Don't you just take the infinite space of bad ideas and cut away
everything that doesn't look like a good API? Sounds easy. ;-)
--Eric
--
"Beware of bugs in the above code; I have only proved it correct, not
tried it."
--Donald Knuth
---------------------------------------------------
http://scratchcomputing.com
---------------------------------------------------
