Re: [tapx-dev] The price of synching STDOUT and STDERR

2007-03-14 Thread Michael G Schwern
Andy Armstrong wrote:
 On 14 Mar 2007, at 07:29, chromatic wrote:
 The problem is that there's no way to tell that that information  
 sent to
 Test::Builder-diag() is diagnostic information for the tests  
 because once it
 goes out on STDERR, it could be anything.
 
 So we seem to have two reasonably sensible options on the table. I  
 don't think they're mutually incompatible.
 
 Ovid's 'only merge STDOUT and STDERR when in verbose mode' seems to  
 be workable with current Test::Builder.
 
 We should also push forward with machine readable diagnostics as a  
 formal part of TAP and have those show up on STDOUT along with all  
 the other TAP.
 
 Did I miss anything?

Nope, looks sane.

This whole debate has revealed that formal TAP diagnostics needs more
consideration then what is in the current proposal.  The ultimate goal is all
information to go on STDOUT, even the warnings and errors if possible, in a
way that the TAP parser can tell them apart.  There's currently no proposal to
do all that.

But we can go ahead with TH 3 now using Ovid's plan without worrying about that.


Re: [tapx-dev] The price of synching STDOUT and STDERR

2007-03-14 Thread Andy Armstrong

On 14 Mar 2007, at 15:45, Michael G Schwern wrote:
But we can go ahead with TH 3 now using Ovid's plan without  
worrying about that.


OK. Unless anyone jumps in first I'll implement it when I get some  
time from Friday onwards.


--
Andy Armstrong, hexten.net