On Thu, May 05, 2005 at 10:12:14AM -0400, Robert ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> Is there an article on the current best practices about creating a module
> with tests? I know there is h2xs but I somewhere in the back of my foggy
> brain I am thinking I read somewhere of a different. more preffered
Is there an article on the current best practices about creating a module
with tests? I know there is h2xs but I somewhere in the back of my foggy
brain I am thinking I read somewhere of a different. more preffered method.
If this is the wrong group to ask, sorry. Just let me know which is the b
On 5 May 2005, at 18:00, David Wheeler wrote:
On May 5, 2005, at 04:26 , Adrian Howard wrote:
Here's a weird idea: how about the option of AJAXing the test
harness results back to a receiving server somewhere that
understands TAP? Bingo: TAP testing of JS embedded in web pages in
its native habi
David Wheeler wrote:
> On May 5, 2005, at 04:26 , Adrian Howard wrote:
>
Here's a weird idea: how about the option of AJAXing the test
harness results back to a receiving server somewhere that
understands TAP? Bingo: TAP testing of JS embedded in web pages in
its native ha
On May 5, 2005, at 04:26 , Adrian Howard wrote:
Here's a weird idea: how about the option of AJAXing the test
harness results back to a receiving server somewhere that
understands TAP? Bingo: TAP testing of JS embedded in web pages
in its native habitat.
That's just evil. Maybe when Schwern
On 4 May 2005, at 01:14, David Wheeler wrote:
On May 3, 2005, at 14:27 , Joe McMahon wrote:
Here's a weird idea: how about the option of AJAXing the test harness
results back to a receiving server somewhere that understands TAP?
Bingo: TAP testing of JS embedded in web pages in its native habitat
