On Apr 12, 2005, at 3:58 PM, James E Keenan wrote:
How do you test that a variable has been tied to a class?
I looked through Test::More; the term 'tie' is conspicuous by its
absence. I also searched the archives of this list and couldn't
locate anything.
I'm looking for something along the lin
Michael G Schwern wrote:
ie. get the object from the tied variable and then treat it like any other
object.
isa_ok tied $var, "A::Class";
tie() always returns an object.
use Tie::File;
tie @data, 'Tie::File', $file or die;
is_tied(@data, $file, "[EMAIL PROTECTED] is tied to \$file");
T
On Tue, Apr 12, 2005 at 06:58:34PM -0400, James E Keenan wrote:
> How do you test that a variable has been tied to a class?
$ perldoc -f tied
tied VARIABLE
Returns a reference to the object underlying VARIABLE (the same
value that was originally returned by the
James E Keenan wrote:
How do you test that a variable has been tied to a class?
I looked through Test::More; the term 'tie' is conspicuous by its
absence. I also searched the archives of this list and couldn't locate
anything.
I'm looking for something along the lines of Test::More::isa_ok that
How do you test that a variable has been tied to a class?
I looked through Test::More; the term 'tie' is conspicuous by its
absence. I also searched the archives of this list and couldn't locate
anything.
I'm looking for something along the lines of Test::More::isa_ok that we
could use like th
On Tue, Apr 12, 2005 at 04:15:01PM -0500, Walter Goulet wrote:
> I think the suggestion to use Test::Legacy was based on the statement
> 'backwards compatibility reasons' require me to use Test.pm. I should
> have been clearer in my explanation; the module author is not
> permitting me to use any a
On Tue, Apr 12, 2005 at 10:57:02PM +0200, Tels wrote:
> > Try Test::Legacy, it gives you an upgrade path away from Test.pm.
> > http://search.cpan.org/dist/Test-Legacy/
> >
> > It almost perfectly emulates the Test.pm interface and it works in
> > conjunction with other test modules. If you're wor
I think the suggestion to use Test::Legacy was based on the statement
'backwards compatibility reasons' require me to use Test.pm. I should
have been clearer in my explanation; the module author is not
permitting me to use any additional modules that aren't included in
perl 5.6.0 to test his module
On Apr 12, 2005, at 2:07 PM, David Wheeler wrote:
I'm pleased to announce the second alpha release of TestSimple, the
port of Test::Builder, Test::Simple, and Test::More to JavaScript.
And you can download it from here:
http://www.justatheory.com/downloads/TestSimple-0.02.tar.gz
Cheers,
David
I'm pleased to announce the second alpha release of TestSimple, the
port of Test::Builder, Test::Simple, and Test::More to JavaScript. This
release has the following changes:
- Removed eqArray() and eqAssoc() functions from TestMore per
suggestion from Michael Schwern. The problem
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Moin,
On Tuesday 12 April 2005 22:15, Michael G Schwern wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 12, 2005 at 01:39:59PM -0500, Walter Goulet wrote:
> > I can't use Test::Simple, I have to use Test.pm for this module for
> > backwards compatibility reasons.
>
> Try Test::Legacy, it
On Tue, Apr 12, 2005 at 01:39:59PM -0500, Walter Goulet wrote:
> I can't use Test::Simple, I have to use Test.pm for this module for
> backwards compatibility reasons.
Try Test::Legacy, it gives you an upgrade path away from Test.pm.
http://search.cpan.org/dist/Test-Legacy/
It almost perfectly em
I can't use Test::Simple, I have to use Test.pm for this module for
backwards compatibility reasons.
I'm trying to replace this function call with an ok() call:
$ctx = Net::SSLeay::SSL_CTX_new() or die ("Unable to create SSL context");
Hard to tell what $ctx is if SSL_CTX_new() fails; I know it
On Tue, Apr 12, 2005 at 12:49:30PM -0500, Walter Goulet wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I was wondering if there is a way to use the ok() function in Test.pm
> to check for a null return value. It looks like the 3 arg form of ok()
> I'm using only tests the first 2 args to see if they're equal.
>
> I'm consider
On Tue, 12 Apr 2005, Paul Johnson wrote:
> I would do it in the same way as if this had nothing to do with tests.
> That is, abstract away the common code into a module, which can also
> live under t/
That would be a lot of work in this case. I found an easier
solution. In tweek-then-foo.t:
Hi,
I was wondering if there is a way to use the ok() function in Test.pm
to check for a null return value. It looks like the 3 arg form of ok()
I'm using only tests the first 2 args to see if they're equal.
I'm considering this approach:
$val = some_func(); # returns NULL on failure
if($val !=
On Tue, Apr 12, 2005 at 01:20:18PM -0400, Sam Tregar wrote:
> Hello all. I've got a test I want to write, but I don't know to write
> it (easily). I've got a test script, call it foo.t which uses
> Test::More and runs under Test::Harness. Now I want to make a new
> test script tweek-then-foo.t
Hello all. I've got a test I want to write, but I don't know to write
it (easily). I've got a test script, call it foo.t which uses
Test::More and runs under Test::Harness. Now I want to make a new
test script tweek-then-foo.t which tweeks the system and then ensures
that foo.t still passes. Ho
Walter Goulet wrote:
Looks like the phalanx kwiki as well as the phalanx subversion
repository is down.
Any ETA on when it will be back up?
I can get the repository but not the kwiki. But, IIRC, the kwiki is
hosted by Ingy and is physically independent of the repository, which I
believe is hos
19 matches
Mail list logo
