On 7/16/06, Jonathan Rockway <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I retract my previous comment. My prototype was, in fact, completely
bogus :)
Let's make that array a reference to a list and everyone will be happy:
can_ok($object, [qw(foo bar baz)], 'reason');
Hopefully that works and makes sense. If
I retract my previous comment. My prototype was, in fact, completely
bogus :)
Let's make that array a reference to a list and everyone will be happy:
can_ok($object, [qw(foo bar baz)], 'reason');
Hopefully that works and makes sense. If !ref $_[1], then just treat it
as a single method name.
> I do not think that prototype means what you think it means.
It means what I think it means. Same syntax as we have currently, no.
You would have to do this:
my @methods = qw(foo bar baz)
can_ok($object, @methods, 'reason')
Instead of:
can_ok($object, qw(foo bar baz), 'reason')
Note that i
Shlomi Fish wrote:
On Friday 07 July 2006 18:39, Andy Lester wrote:
Those who disagree with Shlomi on licenses are small-headed and
ignorant. Got it.
Keep digging that hole, Mr. Fish!
That's not what I said or meant. What I meant was that someone here said and I
quote:
http://www.mail-ar
> On Mon, 17 Jul 2006 02:24:37 +0200, "A. Pagaltzis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> said:
> * Graham Barr <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2006-07-17 02:00]:
>> perl -MDBI\ 999
>> DBI version 999 required--this is only version 1.50.
>> BEGIN failed--compilation aborted.
> You can use an equals sign in
* Graham Barr <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2006-07-17 02:00]:
> perl -MDBI\ 999
> DBI version 999 required--this is only version 1.50.
> BEGIN failed--compilation aborted.
You can use an equals sign instead of a space, there, which makes
it a little easier to type:
perl -MDBI=666 -e1
Regards,
--
#A
David Wheeler wrote:
> On Jul 12, 2006, at 03:41, Gabor Szabo wrote:
>
>> perl -MModule -e'print $Module::VERSION'
>
> I have this alias set up:
>
> function pv () { perl -M$1 -le "print $1->VERSION"; }
>
> I think that calling ->VERSION is more correct.
I am sure this discussion has happene
On Sun, Jul 16, 2006 at 02:53:08AM -0700, Michael G Schwern wrote:
> Miyagawa noticed that the changes to Test::Builder::Tester's
> test_fail() in 0.63 broke Test::Exception and probably plenty others.
> The change broke backwards compat and should not have been accepted.
>
Bleadperl has been upg
Miyagawa noticed that the changes to Test::Builder::Tester's
test_fail() in 0.63 broke Test::Exception and probably plenty others.
The change broke backwards compat and should not have been accepted.
So here's an emergency release to fix that.
0.64 Sun Jul 16 02:47:29 PDT 2006
* 0.63's chan
On 7/15/06, Jonathan Rockway <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Worse, it's inconsistent with the rest of the API:
ok$foo == $bar, $REASON;
is$foo, $bar, $REASON;
is_deeply $foo, $bar, $REASON;
And then this:
skip $REASON, $num;
Sadly, it would be hard to change that since so many
On 7/15/06, Jonathan Rockway <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
What's the reasoning behind accepting an array, anyway?
Convenience. You almost always use can_ok() with a list of methods.
It also makes calculating the plan a little easier for it to be one
test.
I recall waffling around on the interfa
On 7/15/06, Ovid <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I don't particularly like that this is a silent failure, but I'm not sure of a
robust way to fix that. In any event, I reread the docs a couple of times
before I realized I was being stupid. That suggests to me that this little nit
could be improve
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Adam
Kennedy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Nobody would care about dependencies if they never failed (except for
> the issue of installation time).
I have a couple of clients that are very skittish about outside
dependencies in general. They have to get thrid-part
13 matches
Mail list logo
