Pete Krawczyk wrote:
> Subject: skip_all with Test::More?
> From: Tels <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Date: Wed, 31 May 2006 17:53:46 +0200
>
> }
> }use Test::More;
> }
> }plan tests => 123;
> }
> }skip_all( 'reason' ) if ...;
> }
> }# tes
Subject: skip_all with Test::More?
From: Tels <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Wed, 31 May 2006 17:53:46 +0200
}
}use Test::More;
}
}plan tests => 123;
}
}skip_all( 'reason' ) if ...;
}
}# tests here
}
Moin,
I stumbled over a slight problem with Test::More: skip_all is an import
feature, but not a subroutine. So you can do either:
use Test::More;
my $tests;
BEGIN { $tests = 2; plan tests => $tests; }
SKIP: {
skip ( 'reason
Cool, it's manageable for now and our current testing -- using sometimes
large, monolithic Test::More .t files -- is no more flexible so there's no
loss in the move, but the flexibility will be appreciated when you get
around to it. Thanks for putting Test::Class together Adrian!
Andrew
On 5/31/0
Yeah, but it's so convenient to have my test classes reflect the classes of
my application. It makes it so easy to see what's going on when I name my
test methods the same thing as the methods in my application.
Andrew
On 5/31/06 10:47 AM, "A. Pagaltzis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi Andrew,
>
[apologies to andrew for a dupe - didn't notice it went to perl-qa]
On 31 May 2006, at 14:35, Andrew Gianni wrote:
Let me start by admitting that I don't know a whole lot about xUnit
testing.
In fact, using Test::Class is really my first exposure to the idea, so
perhaps I'm asking for somethi
Hi Andrew,
* Andrew Gianni <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2006-05-31 15:40]:
> Is there an easy way to just run that one test method (as well
> as the startup, setup, teardown and shutdown methods) while I'm
> working on it rather than running the whole batch?
just write a base test class with all your sca
Let me start by admitting that I don't know a whole lot about xUnit testing.
In fact, using Test::Class is really my first exposure to the idea, so
perhaps I'm asking for something that doesn't make sense; please bear with
me in case I am.
Test::Class seems like a great idea for so many reasons, b
Thanks, I'm going to give D::D::S a try, as I think it'll do what I'm
looking for. Since I'm testing a subroutine that returns a data-structure
(that happens to contain code-refs), I really don't care about the return
values of the code-refs because those are tested elsewhere (through testing
the c
On 5/30/06, chromatic <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Tuesday 30 May 2006 12:08, Nicholas Perez wrote:
> Why not compare signatures? Is that not feasible?
Which signatures? Is it important that the code comes from the same place
(check the CV properties) or that the code has bound to the same le
10 matches
Mail list logo
