There's a bikeshedding question of some visibility: now that we have a C<fail> builtin, what do we do with C<Test::fail>?
There's plenty of code out there that uses fail as an exported function from pugs' Test.pm or Perl 5 testing modules. We want to keep Test primitives exported and fun to use, to encourage people to use them a lot; so requiring a fully qualified call would go against the grain. But the builtin has even more of that concern: it should become the more common, too. If one is to be renamed, it looks like is the Test one, despite existing legacy code. Discussion on #perl6 brought up &flunk as a candidate name. Its merits, including its, uh, dropout cuteness, are many; it rings well against fail, alludes to tests, can probably be backported to the Perl 5 test modules, etc. What say? [++] <dduncan autrijus> -- Gaal Yahas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://gaal.livejournal.com/
