Re: TAP Version (was: RE: Test comments)

2005-02-18 Thread Geoffrey Young
> Hm, that does seem valuable. Should all test modules report their > versions by default, though? well, my thought was that it was more important to list the source of the comparison operators the user uses (like is() or eq_array()) than it was the internal stuff that, say, interfaces with Test

Re: Test::AnnounceVersion (was: TAP Version (was: RE: Test comments))

2005-02-18 Thread James E Keenan
Fergal Daly wrote: I was thinking of knocking together Test::AnnounceVersion. use Test::AnnounceVersion qw(A::List Of::Modules); which results in # using version 1.5 of A::List # using version 0.1 of Of::Modules supplying no import args would make it output $VERSION from every package it can find.

Re: TAP Version (was: RE: Test comments)

2005-02-18 Thread Fergal Daly
I was thinking of knocking together Test::AnnounceVersion. use Test::AnnounceVersion qw(A::List Of::Modules); which results in # using version 1.5 of A::List # using version 0.1 of Of::Modules supplying no import args would make it output $VERSION from every package it can find. If you don't w

Re: TAP Version (was: RE: Test comments)

2005-02-18 Thread chromatic
On Fri, 2005-02-18 at 09:25 -0500, Geoffrey Young wrote: > yeah, I'll second this, at least so far as adding a version component to > Test::More goes (which is different than adding a TAP version, which I don't > have an opinion on:). Test.pm currently prints out > > # Using Test.pm version 1.

Re: TAP Version (was: RE: Test comments)

2005-02-18 Thread Michael G Schwern
On Fri, Feb 18, 2005 at 01:41:17PM +, Mark Stosberg wrote: > > Err, why? Who else is emitting a version string? Or anything? Do we > > start prefixing everything else with TAP? > > I have intentionally put version strings in the output, especially of > of related modules. For example, DBD::

Re: TAP Version (was: RE: Test comments)

2005-02-18 Thread Geoffrey Young
> This is helpful for processing bug reports, so I don't have to make > second trip back to the user to ask: "What version of CGI.pm where you > using?". yeah, I'll second this, at least so far as adding a version component to Test::More goes (which is different than adding a TAP version, which

Re: TAP Version (was: RE: Test comments)

2005-02-18 Thread Mark Stosberg
On 2005-02-18, Michael G Schwern <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Fri, Feb 18, 2005 at 01:13:05AM +, Mark Stosberg wrote: >> On 2005-02-15, Clayton, Nik <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> > >> >ver 1.1 >> >> If you go this route, I would make it clear whose emitting the version >> string: >> >>