On 27 Feb 2008, at 00:48, James E Keenan wrote:
My thanks to Andy Armstrong and all others who contributed to this
development, which will open up new approaches to testing with Perl.
Splendid news, thanks Jim.
(I am recommending one refinement in the App::Prove code underlying
this version
James E Keenan wrote:
I would like to be able to provide the tests run via 'prove' with
options something like this:
some_variant_of_prove t/*.t --option1 --option2 arg1 arg2
... where those 4 command-line options/arguments would be available to
*each* of the individual test files in the
Yitzchak Scott-Thoennes wrote:
On Mon, Feb 25, 2008 at 03:59:37PM -0800, Michael G Schwern wrote:
MakeMaker uses ExtUtils::CBuilder->have_compiler() in it's tests. It's
worked well with no complaints. It's an additional testing dependency,
but it's a useful one and Module::Build will eventual
Adrian Howard wrote:
On 26 Feb 2008, at 08:53, Cosimo Streppone wrote:
Hi all,
I'm using Test::Class and I'm happy with it.
I wrote several test classes which inherit from T::C,
but I wanted to avoid the "1-*.t-script-for-each-test-class"
approach.
You mean like Test::Class::Load
Yes, exa
On 26 Feb 2008, at 08:53, Cosimo Streppone wrote:
Hi all,
I'm using Test::Class and I'm happy with it.
I wrote several test classes which inherit from T::C,
but I wanted to avoid the "1-*.t-script-for-each-test-class"
approach.
[snip]
You mean like Test::Class::Load
http://search.cpan.org/d
Hi all,
I'm using Test::Class and I'm happy with it.
I wrote several test classes which inherit from T::C,
but I wanted to avoid the "1-*.t-script-for-each-test-class"
approach.
I thought of writing a "generic" *.t script that
I called `-test-classes.t' which looks for
test packages inside the c
