Can TAP::Parser already parse nested TAP?

2012-06-01 Thread Steffen Schwigon
Hi! I just got confused about the state of parsing nested TAP. I thought at least TAP::Parser (v24, from github) would already parse nested TAP. Doesn't it? Do I need to turn it on somehow? My expectation came from Test::More propagating it like this: subtest 'An example subtest' = sub

Nested TAP

2009-04-06 Thread Ovid
I've made another tiny commit to Test::Builder to handle nested TAP with no tests run. It's the last edge case I can think of. Andy Armstrong's working on the TAP::Parser to make it a bit more useful with nested TAP. Wondering if anyone's played with nested TAP yet and has any comments

Re: Nested TAP

2009-04-06 Thread Ricardo SIGNES
* Ovid publiustemp-perl...@yahoo.com [2009-04-06T04:35:41] Wondering if anyone's played with nested TAP yet and has any comments/requests/questions? Lot's of people have asked for it, so it would be good to make sure we've got it right before it's pushed out the door. I've given it a bit

Re: Nested TAP

2009-04-06 Thread Ovid
- Original Message From: Ricardo SIGNES perl...@rjbs.manxome.org * Ovid [2009-04-06T04:35:41] Wondering if anyone's played with nested TAP yet and has any comments/requests/questions? Lot's of people have asked for it, so it would be good to make sure we've got it right before

Re: Nested TAP

2009-04-06 Thread Ricardo SIGNES
* Ovid publiustemp-perl...@yahoo.com [2009-04-06T10:52:33] I thought it might be nice to give the group a description, but really just diagging a description should be good enough for me. I can wait for TAP 15 with preludes, envelopes, and the SWAK marker. Actually, you do a get

Nested TAP

2009-03-29 Thread Ovid
Just to let folks know, at the Perl-QA Hackathon, I've implemented nested TAP in Test::Builder. Andy Armstrong is working on the Test::Harness side. It's completely backwards compatible and works with the current Test::Harness, but we're trying to expose more information via the harness

Re: Nested TAP

2009-03-29 Thread Yanick Champoux
Ovid wrote: Just to let folks know, at the Perl-QA Hackathon, I've implemented nested TAP in Test::Builder. Ooooh This calls for a spontaneous dance of joy! A few months ago, I hacked Test::Class so that it uses Test::Group to aggregate the subtests of each test. Changing

Re: Nested TAP

2009-03-29 Thread Adrian Howard
On 29 Mar 2009, at 17:34, Yanick Champoux wrote: Ovid wrote: Just to let folks know, at the Perl-QA Hackathon, I've implemented nested TAP in Test::Builder. Ooooh This calls for a spontaneous dance of joy! A few months ago, I hacked Test::Class so that it uses Test::Group

Nested TAP

2008-04-10 Thread Ovid
One issue we covered at the Hackathon was how to do nested TAP. The suggestion that was adopted was not backwards-compatible, but it was felt this was OK because the TAP consumer specifically had to request this. I hated this decision, but was hard-pressed to argue against it because making

Nested TAP at Oslo?

2008-03-26 Thread Ovid
, I've been asked to replicate a bit of our test harness output inside of Test::Aggregate. In short, we need nested TAP. Is there any chance we can produce something viable in Oslo that's likely to solve this problem or is this a low enough priority in most people's minds that they're not bothered

Re: Nested TAP at Oslo?

2008-03-26 Thread Andy Armstrong
On 25 Mar 2008, at 18:31, Ovid wrote: Is there any chance we can produce something viable in Oslo that's likely to solve this problem or is this a low enough priority in most people's minds that they're not bothered? I'm keenly focused on managing large-scale test suites and need stuff like

Re: Nested TAP at Oslo?

2008-03-26 Thread Fergal Daly
On 26/03/2008, Andy Armstrong [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 25 Mar 2008, at 18:31, Ovid wrote: Is there any chance we can produce something viable in Oslo that's likely to solve this problem or is this a low enough priority in most people's minds that they're not bothered? I'm keenly

Re: Nested TAP at Oslo?

2008-03-26 Thread Andy Armstrong
On 26 Mar 2008, at 11:13, Fergal Daly wrote: I'm +1 on that. It's not too hard to add nested blocks to the parser - in fact I've already done that experimentally. I got stuck on the API design around how we represent nested results without overcomplicating the existing parser interface. That