On 19-Apr-06, at 9:12 AM, Andrew Gianni wrote:
I'm exploring my options for use case testing of Web apps in Perl.
Does any
have any experience, recommendations or resources to suggest on the
topic?
We're working on some pretty complicated Web apps (written in Perl)
and
while we have our unit
I can't remember the exact list off the top of my head.
At the time, I did the cascade tracing by hand using the CPANTS webpage,
it took for-bloody-ever. The only reason I kept doing as deep as I did
was that I kept being astonished at what was getting caught in the web.
There's been somethin
* Fergal Daly <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2006-04-19T15:24:51]
> On 4/19/06, Ricardo SIGNES <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > There are other things that test test output, like Test::Tester. Will they
> > break? To find out, I downloaded a pristene copy of the latest Test-Simple
> > and Test-Tester and
Based on what I've gleaned from
http://search.cpan.org/~petdance/Test-Harness-2.56/lib/Test/Harness/TAP.pod#Diagnostics,
here's a first pass at an EBNF grammar for TAP. Note that it's
incomplete, but it should be a good start for folks to at least think
about this.
Cheers,
Ovid
(*
For the t
On 4/19/06, David Wheeler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Apr 19, 2006, at 12:14, Fergal Daly wrote:
>
> > One other reason (that I didn't see mentioned) is that objects imply
> > that the harness and tests are in the same process which means that
> > the tests can corrupt the harness and that the
On Apr 19, 2006, at 12:14, Fergal Daly wrote:
One other reason (that I didn't see mentioned) is that objects imply
that the harness and tests are in the same process which means that
the tests can corrupt the harness and that the harness can fail to
report if the test process dies,
Well, the h
On 4/19/06, Ricardo SIGNES <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> * Ovid <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2006-04-19T04:02:31]
> > From a parser standpoint, there's no clean way of distinguishing that
> > from what the test functions are going to output. As a result, I
> > really think that "diag" and normal test failu
On 4/18/06, Ovid <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> --- David Wheeler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Test.Simple—JavaScript. It looks and acts just like tap, although in
> > reality it's tracking test results in an object rather than scraping
> > them from a print buffer.
> >
> >http://openjsan.org/d
On 4/18/06, Adam Kennedy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> The aformentioned change to Test::Builder broke 3 different Test-Testing
> modules that relied on it.
3? I only know of 2 - Test::Builder::Tester (which scrapes and broke)
and Test::Tester (which doesn't scrape and didn't break). Is there
anoth
Just a quick clarification of the POD
(http://search.cpan.org/~petdance/Test-Harness-2.56/lib/Test/Harness/TAP.pod#Diagnostics)
Description
Any text after the test number but before a # is the description of
the test point.
ok 42 this is the description of the test
Earlier it states t
* A. Pagaltzis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2006-04-19 19:10]:
> Use JSON. It’s cross-language, can fit data structures on a
> single line, is reasonably widely supported, and can even be
> read by a YAML parser.
Oh, and I forgot: in contrast to YAML, the spec is so simple
that it’s trivial to cook an imp
* Ovid <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2006-04-19 10:05]:
> --- demerphq <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > I should think that youd have a much easier time using
> > Data::Dumper and its ->Pad and ->Indent(0) method than you
> > ever would with YAML.
>
> That fails when we have PHP, C, or Java producing the
> i
I'm exploring my options for use case testing of Web apps in Perl. Does any
have any experience, recommendations or resources to suggest on the topic?
We're working on some pretty complicated Web apps (written in Perl) and
while we have our unit testing well under control, our development of mech
t
On 4/19/06, David H. Adler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 19, 2006 at 12:52:41AM -0500, Andy Lester wrote:
> > Please try out this dev release. I'd like to make it 2.58 tomorrow.
>
> Looks fairly good here. A warning, but nothing show stopping.
>
> ~/Test-Harness-2.57_05 11:55:36% make t
On Wed, Apr 19, 2006 at 12:52:41AM -0500, Andy Lester wrote:
> Please try out this dev release. I'd like to make it 2.58 tomorrow.
Looks fairly good here. A warning, but nothing show stopping.
~/Test-Harness-2.57_05 11:55:36% make test
PERL_DL_NONLAZY=1 /usr/local/bin/perl "-MExtUtils::Command::
* Ovid <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2006-04-19T04:02:31]
> From a parser standpoint, there's no clean way of distinguishing that
> from what the test functions are going to output. As a result, I
> really think that "diag" and normal test failure information should be
> marked differently (instead of the
Andy Lester wrote in perl.qa :
> Please try out this dev release. I'd like to make it 2.58 tomorrow.
Now integrated into bleadperl, all tests pass here.
--
* What system had proved more effective?
* Indirect suggestion implicating selfinterest.
-- Ulysses
--- Ovid <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > If you mean you want pluck YAML test results from a noisy input
> > stream I'd say youd probably be wrong.
Naturally, I forgot to include the most compelling argument. The
"noisy input stream" is noisy only because we've never tamed it. If it
becomes well-
--- demerphq <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 4/19/06, Ovid <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > to handle got/expected failure information in Java or C? There are
> > pretty rich data structures we could put out there and YAML might
> help.
> > That would also likely simplify a parser.
>
> If you mea
19 matches
Mail list logo
