On 2012.6.1 5:40 AM, Steffen Schwigon wrote:
> I am about to upload Test::TAPv13. I also did an prepan entry for that.
>
> PrePAN: http://prepan.org/module/429En4oFbn .
> URL: https://github.com/renormalist/Test-TAPv13
> Synopsis:
>
> use Test::TAPv13 ':all'; # must come before Test::More
> use Test::More tests => 2;
>
> my $data = { affe => { tiger => 111,
> birne => "amazing",
> loewe => [ qw( 1 two three) ],
> },
> zomtec => "here's another one",
> "DrWho" => undef,
> };
>
> ok(1, "hot stuff");
> tap13_yaml($data);
> tap13_pragma "+strict";
> ok(1, "more hot stuff");
>
> Does it make sense?
> Did I overlook an existing way to generate TAP v13?
I'm just seeing this now. The output looks correct and I'm happy to see
somebody playing with the structured diagnostics for reals! There's a few
code nits, but I'll note them on github.
Test::Builder1.5 can generate TAP v13, in fact it does so by default, but is
currently lacking the structured diagnostics part. Part of this is just
time/effort, but the larger part is with how tests are written...
The problem with...
ok( ... );
diagnostics( ... );
Is that there's no reliable way to know that diagnostics() goes with the
previous ok(). This is ok for TAP, where the test result and diagnostics are
on separate lines and can be printed separately, but other formats need to
print out the results and diagnostics together. Like anything where the
diagnostics information is inside a <result> tag, for example.
That pattern has to be rethought. This was one of the goals of Test::Builder2
(the new class to replace Test::Builder) but that is on hold. Any thoughts?
Also, when did we add the pragma thing?
--
The interface should be as clean as newly fallen snow and its behavior
as explicit as Japanese eel porn.
