David Golden wrote:
> Probably could be done with a Build.PL that pulls the full module list
> then constructs a massive requires hash. Unless CPANTS scans for
> dependencies, in which case you'd need to build the .pm file
> dynamically, too. And then run a cron job to rebuild/re-release with
> c
http://qa.perl.org/test-modules.html has a bunch of test modules listed.
However, there are no harnesses listed. I know Test::Harness, and I'm
going to go read about Test::Builder, but what other "meta-testing"
modules are there?
Did anything ever happen with a distributed tester?
--Peter
Michael G Schwern wrote:
Is it possible to standardize this, so a generic harness knows
which test a comment line acctually describes?
I'm going to call a big, fat YAGNI on this one for the time being. It
requires a change to both the protocol and testing libraries for a minimal
organizational im
Peter Kay wrote:
The formatting seems a bit off ( =head2 as opposed to == ... == ). Is
this easier to fix progromatically, or should I be editing as I read?
Too late, I changed it!
--Peter
Chromatic wrote:
1) an optional description of a test, which occurs after the test number
but precedes an optional '#' character and anything following until the
newline character, having no effect on parsing
Summary?
That's what the one line short description in Bugzilla is called.
--Peter
Ian Langworth wrote:
On Jan 26, 2005, at 3:48p, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
My main gripe is that the infrastructure for it is less OO friendly. The
example with the HTML output was awesome..until i looked at how it
was
done. The inability to get a data structure back for the test results
is v
And it appears to be mostly intact from how I remembered it a year or so ago.
Steve Peters
The formatting seems a bit off ( =head2 as opposed to == ... == ). Is
this easier to fix progromatically, or should I be editing as I read?
--WikiGnome
I am attempting to write tests (using whichever Tests::...) for a module
that will use Test::Harness. The module outputs to STDOUT (it just does).
Now, in theory, Test::Harness currently ignores anything that doesn't
start with "ok" or "not ok", but for whatever reason, when I have
"no_plan",
Just a comment; could Tinderbox's code be used to manage the
client/server interaction?
--Peter
