Fergal Daly wrote:
> I'm assuming here that test modules will provide these diagnostics in
> a similar way to the old style, something like:
>
> my $TB = Test::Builder->new()
>
> sub my_test {
> blah();
> $TB->ok();
> if ($TB->can("verbose_diag") {
> $TB->verbose_diag({...});
> } else
On 02/09/07, Michael G Schwern <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Fergal Daly wrote:
> It goes out via the normal TAP stream with all the "ok" and "not ok". That
> is, STDOUT.
>
> Or are you asking about the guts of Test::Builder? I haven't planned it out
> much but I'm thinking something like...
>
>
Fergal Daly wrote:
>> diagnostic( {
>> found => $found, # can be stand-alone
>> wanted => $wanted, # must always be present with 'found'
>> display => $display, # optional human-readable presentation
>> extra => $extra, # anything else. Useful for custom harnesses
>>
demerphq wrote:
> On 9/2/07, Michael G Schwern <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> The first is a single ISO 8601 datetime. The latter is an ISO 8601 date and
>> an ISO 8601 time separated by a space. Two data fields instead of one. So
>> it's all kosher, we just have to specify that's what we're doin
On 01/09/07, Ovid <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> Please read and comment on this. Many folks ignore these emails, but
> we're talking about the new version of TAP here! Feedback is
> important.
>
> Schwern: you're specifically copied on this as you maintain
> Test::Simple. If we get t
On 9/2/07, Michael G Schwern <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> The first is a single ISO 8601 datetime. The latter is an ISO 8601 date and
> an ISO 8601 time separated by a space. Two data fields instead of one. So
> it's all kosher, we just have to specify that's what we're doing.
>
> tapdat
Ovid wrote:
> --- Michael G Schwern <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> As Test::More cannot have any dependencies, I'd rather incorporate
>> TAP diagnostic functionality directly into Test::Builder. Besides,
>> spitting out some YAML isn't hard.
>
> It turns out to be a fair bit harder than it appe
Ovid wrote:
> --- Eric Wilhelm <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> I'm not sure the YAML spec distinguishes between string and number
>> when
>> the string is a number.
>>
>> $ perl -e 'use YAML; warn YAML::Dump([3,"3"]);'
>> ---
>> - 3
>> - 3
>> $ perl -e 'use YAML::Syck; warn YAML::Syck::
On 9/1/07, Ovid <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> --- Eric Wilhelm <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > I'm not sure the YAML spec distinguishes between string and number
> > when
> > the string is a number.
> >
> > $ perl -e 'use YAML; warn YAML::Dump([3,"3"]);'
> > ---
> > - 3
> > - 3
> > $ perl
# from Ovid
# on Saturday 01 September 2007 11:51 am:
>Ah, crud. Is this because YAML doesn't quote things without
> whitespace?
Or because it is representing numbers as text?
> That really seems like a serious limitation to me.
Why?
> Can I
> really keep a straight face and tell a C program
Well then.. Sorry for the late answer... I'm sorry i though i was on the good
list, then I will take back the question. Thank your for the answer!
Gergely.
-Original Message-
From: James E Keenan [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Sat 9/1/2007 6:31 PM
To: perl-qa@perl.org; Smylers
Subject:
--- Eric Wilhelm <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I'm not sure the YAML spec distinguishes between string and number
> when
> the string is a number.
>
> $ perl -e 'use YAML; warn YAML::Dump([3,"3"]);'
> ---
> - 3
> - 3
> $ perl -e 'use YAML::Syck; warn YAML::Syck::Dump([3,"3"]);'
> ---
# from Ovid
# on Saturday 01 September 2007 11:22 am:
>Except that we cribbed much of our YAML code from YAML tiny and it
> gets this wrong, too:
>
> $ perl -MYAML::Tiny=Dump -le 'print Dump([3,"3"])'
> ---
> - 3
> - 3
I'm not sure the YAML spec distinguishes between string and number when
t
--- Eric Wilhelm <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> # from Ovid
> # on Saturday 01 September 2007 10:36 am:
>
> >> As Test::More cannot have any dependencies, I'd rather incorporate
> >> TAP diagnostic functionality directly into Test::Builder.
> Besides,
> >> spitting out some YAML isn't hard.
> >
>
# from Ovid
# on Saturday 01 September 2007 10:36 am:
>> As Test::More cannot have any dependencies, I'd rather incorporate
>> TAP diagnostic functionality directly into Test::Builder. Besides,
>> spitting out some YAML isn't hard.
>
>It turns out to be a fair bit harder than it appears to be on
--- Michael G Schwern <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> As Test::More cannot have any dependencies, I'd rather incorporate
> TAP diagnostic functionality directly into Test::Builder. Besides,
> spitting out some YAML isn't hard.
It turns out to be a fair bit harder than it appears to be on the
surfac
# from demerphq
# on Saturday 01 September 2007 07:59 am:
>> > Could this be a reason NOT to emit a YAML stream?
>>
>> Not particularly, why do you ask?
>
>Cause id hate to see all this work done and then find out that its
>less than it could be because YAML in the end doesnt meet the
>requirement
Smylers wrote:
James E Keenan writes:
The subject of this thread is Win32::GuiTest -- I know nothing about it,
but given it's a module for use with testing it seems on-topic for this
list.
You are correct. I focused exclusively on the body of the message and
not on the subject. Sorry.
On 9/1/07, Michael G Schwern <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> demerphq wrote:
> > On 9/1/07, Fergal Daly <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> On a tangent, I think using quotes is important otherwise you end up
> >> output like
> >>
> >> wanted: elbow
> >> found: elbow
> >>
> >> when what you r
demerphq wrote:
> On 9/1/07, Fergal Daly <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> On a tangent, I think using quotes is important otherwise you end up output
>> like
>>
>> wanted: elbow
>> found: elbow
>>
>> when what you really needed was
>>
>> wanted: 'elbow'
>> found: 'elbow '
No
Ovid wrote:
> Schwern: you're specifically copied on this as you maintain
> Test::Simple. If we get this working, how would you feel about a patch
> to Test::Simple that makes this automatically incorporated into new
> test suites which upgrade Test::Simple? The obvious problem is that
> this wo
On 9/1/07, Fergal Daly <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 30/08/07, Ovid <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > After doing a bit of thinking about this and chatting with Andy
> > Armstrong about this, I've realized that much of the current thought
> > about the TAP diagnostics is wrong. We already have much
On 30/08/07, Ovid <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> After doing a bit of thinking about this and chatting with Andy
> Armstrong about this, I've realized that much of the current thought
> about the TAP diagnostics is wrong. We already have much of what we
> want in the TAP line above the diagnostics s
--- Michael G Schwern <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Ovid wrote:
> > After doing a bit of thinking about this and chatting with Andy
> > Armstrong about this, I've realized that much of the current
> thought
> > about the TAP diagnostics is wrong. We already have much of what
> we
> > want in the T
James E Keenan writes:
> Gergely Brautigam wrote:
> > Does anybody know why is that so that sometimes when trying to set a
> > focuse to a window the window does not come into forground but it
> > stays on the menubar and just blinks...? Is that a windows problem
> > or a Win32 module problem?
>
Hi all,
Please read and comment on this. Many folks ignore these emails, but
we're talking about the new version of TAP here! Feedback is
important.
Schwern: you're specifically copied on this as you maintain
Test::Simple. If we get this working, how would you feel about a patch
to Test::Simp
26 matches
Mail list logo
