Michael G Schwern writes:
my $foo = $p || $q is not boolean. I'm not even sure you can call
it pseudo-boolean without understanding the surrounding code. How
do you know that $q can never be false?
So we want some way of annotating the code which will let Devel::Cover
know that you're
On Tue, Jul 12, 2005 at 07:45:35AM +, Smylers wrote:
I can see why having 'inline' directives specifically for Devel::Cover
could be seen as ugly, but if instead they are general-purpose
assumptions then it's obviously better to have them next to the code
that's relying on the assumption
Ivan Tubert-Brohman writes:
I'm happy to listen to your suggestions; AnnoCPAN is a work in
progress and I'm still adding features and fixing bugs.
Thanks Ivan for your work on this.
I'm also considering the possibility of sending automated emails,
similar to what rt.cpan.org does. However,
On Tue, Jul 12, 2005 at 07:37:05AM +, Smylers wrote:
Opt-out (or no-option) would irritate far too many people (not
necessarily rationally, but it would). But people can only opt in if
they know it exists to opt in to. Perhaps you could send one mail once,
the first time each author has
Ian Langworth wrote:
On 7/8/05, James E Keenan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
One other curiosum: As a result of my Phalanx work, I've gotten in the
habit of using File::Temp to create 'anonymous' directories and files in
which to conduct testing.
This is one of the many features of Test::Cmd,
On 12 Jul 2005, at 22:00, Michael G Schwern wrote:
Barbie's journal, via Ovid, made me aware of patent EP1170667
Software
Package Verification granted last month in the EU.
http://gauss.ffii.org/PatentView/EP1170667
[snip]
Oh for f**k's sake :-(
Don't know any patent lawyers myself, but it
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Moin,
On Tuesday 12 July 2005 23:00, Michael G Schwern wrote:
Barbie's journal, via Ovid, made me aware of patent EP1170667 Software
Package Verification granted last month in the EU.
http://gauss.ffii.org/PatentView/EP1170667
It appears to patent basic
On 12 Jul 2005, at 23:07, Adrian Howard wrote:
[snip]
Don't know any patent lawyers myself, but it might be worth
dropping a line to one or more of:
http://www.nosoftwarepatents.com/en/m/about/contact.html
http://fsfeurope.org/
[snip]
http://www.eurolinux.org/ also might be worth
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I respectfully disagree. I think you're focusing too much on the low-level
behavior of || returning one of its operands. That behavior makes Perl's syntax
flexible and a little ambiguous. Because Perl doesn't make a distinction between
assign with a default value and
I'd like to improve HTTP::Recorder. I've contacted Linda Julien
(http://search.cpan.org/~leira/) via her CPAN email address, but I've
received no response. The module hasn't been touched in over a year
and every RT ticket seems to have gone unanswered
Tels wrote:
On Tuesday 12 July 2005 23:00, Michael G Schwern wrote:
Barbie's journal, via Ovid, made me aware of patent EP1170667
Software
Package Verification granted last month in the EU.
http://gauss.ffii.org/PatentView/EP1170667
It appears to patent basic software testing frameworks.
On Tue, Jul 12, 2005 at 07:35:40PM -0400, Ian Langworth wrote:
I'd like to improve HTTP::Recorder. I've contacted Linda Julien
(http://search.cpan.org/~leira/) via her CPAN email address, but I've
received no response. The module hasn't been touched in over a year
and every RT ticket seems to
Michael G Schwern wrote:
The other examples in the ticket play out the same way:
bless {}, ref $class || $class;
I encountered the coverage problem inherent in this code in the
constructor of a module whose maintenance I recently assumed. (For that
matter, I could have
James E Keenan wrote:
Michael G Schwern wrote:
Oh yeah, forgot about that. Its not in your path so you have to give
it the full path to the program.
The directories in blib have no relation to where the file came from.
Non-binary executables always go into blib/script. Binary
On Tue, Jul 12, 2005 at 10:44:02PM -0400, James E Keenan wrote:
The other examples in the ticket play out the same way:
bless {}, ref $class || $class;
I encountered the coverage problem inherent in this code in the
constructor of a module whose maintenance I recently assumed.
On Tue, Jul 12, 2005 at 10:52:44PM -0400, James E Keenan wrote:
qr// is the only
thing I really miss.
After spending/wasting a couple of hours trying to do regex tests with
just 'ok', I agree.
like() takes a string.
like( $foo, qr/regex/ ); # same
like( $foo,
16 matches
Mail list logo
