Ovid wrote:
> One concern is where Larry asks:
>
> I wonder how often we'd have people making the error
> of trying to interpoalte into :ok<bad $x pardner>
>
>
>
> I'd be one of them. The following is a very common idiom:
>
> for my $method (@methods) {
> can_ok $object, $method;
> lives_ok { $object->$method } "... and calling '$method' isn't fatal";
> }
Single angle quotes are just like single quotes in that they don't
interpolate, whereas double angle quotes are just like double quotes;
they interpolate.
So you can just write :ok«... and calling '$method' isn't fatal», or
:ok<<...>> or :ok("...") - it's not like there were only one way to
write an attribute ;-)
Surely people will make mistakes when they blindly assume things, but
they'll learn it rather quickly.
(BTW I want the non-interpolating test description just as often as the
interpolating one, as in :ok<Varible $x got the right value>; but that
might be because I'm testing Perl 6, not user-level applications).
> Interpolation in the test description is very important on iterative tests or
> to distingiush similar tests
That's why there's still more than one way to do it ;-)
Cheers,
Moritz
