Burke" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: TestSimple/More/Builder in JavaScript
Michael G Schwern wrote:
But getting some sort of hosting could be great if nothing else than
to
get this discussion off of perl-qa and use.perl and onto a proper
mailing
list.
http://groups-bet
On Apr 17, 2005, at 5:05 PM, Michael G Schwern wrote:
http://dynapi.sourceforge.net/dynapi/
Perhaps, But then the mail lists are simply hosted by SourceForge.
Ick.
Sorry, the point was more "drag these guys into this" as they have
obviously
thought about the problem of includes and library paths.
On Sun, Apr 17, 2005 at 04:26:32PM -0700, David Wheeler wrote:
> On Apr 17, 2005, at 3:12 PM, Michael G Schwern wrote:
> >Perhaps the DynAPI folks might be interested.
> >http://dynapi.sourceforge.net/dynapi/
>
> Perhaps, But then the mail lists are simply hosted by SourceForge. Ick.
Sorry, the p
On Apr 17, 2005, at 3:12 PM, Michael G Schwern wrote:
Perhaps the DynAPI folks might be interested.
http://dynapi.sourceforge.net/dynapi/
Perhaps, But then the mail lists are simply hosted by SourceForge. Ick.
And then there's the whole Ajax thing which I'm not really up on enough
to detect if ther
On Sun, Apr 17, 2005 at 05:23:56PM -0400, jesse wrote:
> I'm betting there is no javascript community organization we can
> leverage.
Perhaps the DynAPI folks might be interested.
http://dynapi.sourceforge.net/dynapi/
And then there's the whole Ajax thing which I'm not really up on enough
to dete
> Well, you should know that there are a now a number of people I know of
> who are working on JSAN-y things in parallel. I've Cc'd them on this
> message. Maybe we should set up a mail list somewhere an coordinate our
> efforts? What would be the proper venue for that?
I'm betting there is n
On Apr 16, 2005, at 2:53 PM, Adam Kennedy wrote:
JSPANTS, you mean? I think we need a CJSPAN, first. Alias?
Yes well... I'm getting there slowly.
JavaScript::Librarian + Algorithm::Dependency + YAML ought to be
enough to get some basics sorted out...
Well, you should know that there are a now a nu
David Wheeler wrote:
On Apr 7, 2005, at 11:32 AM, Christopher H. Laco wrote:
OK, now whos gonna build JPANTS? :-)
JSPANTS, you mean? I think we need a CJSPAN, first. Alias?
Yes well... I'm getting there slowly.
JavaScript::Librarian + Algorithm::Dependency + YAML ought to be enough
to get some b
On Apr 8, 2005, at 10:28 AM, Michael G Schwern wrote:
Nahh, I'll start slamming now. :) The eq_* salad was a mistake and
I've
been planning on deprecating them for a while now. No sense in
parroting
mistakes forward.
By the way, I've just removed those from my svn repository, and changed
eqSet
On Fri, Apr 08, 2005 at 12:36:16PM -0400, Geoffrey Young wrote:
> as someone familiar with T::M and not javascript, were I to try to use this
> it's an additional barrier to call it "Test::More in JavaScript" but not
> provide _the exact same functions_ as Test::More. now before everyone
> starts
On Apr 8, 2005, at 9:36 AM, Geoffrey Young wrote:
as someone familiar with T::M and not javascript, were I to try to use
this
it's an additional barrier to call it "Test::More in JavaScript" but
not
provide _the exact same functions_ as Test::More. now before everyone
starts slamming this let me
On Apr 8, 2005, at 8:23 AM, Adrian Howard wrote:
I did once hack JSUnit to output TAP - so you never know :-)
You are a very sick man. :-)
D
On Apr 7, 2005, at 2:41 PM, Ovid wrote:
It's my understanding that the Ecmascript standard leaves garbage
collection up to the implementation. I suspect this means we can't be
sure exactly when an object is destroyed, though whether or not this
has any bearing on David's problem is not clear to me
David Wheeler wrote:
> On Apr 7, 2005, at 5:55 PM, Michael G Schwern wrote:
>
>> If you have isDeeply() there's little point to the eq* salad.
>
>
> Hrm, fair enough. I'll comment them out, then...
well, a few thoughts here...
as someone familiar with T::M and not javascript, were I to try t
On 7 Apr 2005, at 20:27, David Wheeler wrote:
[snip]
Besides, I'm sure that Adrian will soon take my code to port
Test::Class to JavaScript, and then we can have both approaches! ;-)
I did once hack JSUnit to output TAP - so you never know :-)
Adrian
On 7 Apr 2005, at 19:23, David Wheeler wrote:
Greetings fellow Perlers,
I'm pleased to announce the first alpha release of my port of
TestSimple/More/Builder to JavaScript. You can download it from:
http://www.justatheory.com/downloads/TestBuilder-0.01.tar.gz
[snip]
You rock! Excellent stuff. O
--- Michael G Schwern <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> This
> > is because there is no END block to grab on to in JavaScript.
>
> Could object destruction be used somehow?
It's my understanding that the Ecmascript standard leaves garbage
collection up to the implementation. I suspect this means
On Apr 7, 2005, at 5:55 PM, Michael G Schwern wrote:
If you have isDeeply() there's little point to the eq* salad.
Hrm, fair enough. I'll comment them out, then...
Cheers,
David
On Thu, Apr 07, 2005 at 04:17:03PM -0700, David Wheeler wrote:
> Well, right now, isDeeply() should do the right thing. I could just
> comment out the eqArray() and eqAssoc() functions, or make them tests,
> too. That'd be pretty easy to do, actually.
If you have isDeeply() there's little point
On Apr 7, 2005, at 1:40 PM, Michael G Schwern wrote:
Zee goggles, zey do nothing!!!
I thought I eliminated the radiation...
Not so different, that's what I would have done were it not for the
fact
that it alters caller(). If Javascript has no such problems then do
it,
but I suspect it does.
I ha
On Apr 7, 2005, at 12:46 PM, Ovid wrote:
Great work!
Thanks.
Output them to a Results object which, by default, sends the output to
document.write() but allows the user to redirect the output. For
example, it might be nice to have test results pop up in a separate
window while the main page loads.
On Thu, Apr 07, 2005 at 11:23:59AM -0700, David Wheeler wrote:
> Greetings fellow Perlers,
>
> I'm pleased to announce the first alpha release of my port of
> TestSimple/More/Builder to JavaScript. You can download it from:
>
> http://www.justatheory.com/downloads/TestBuilder-0.01.tar.gz
Zee
David,
Great work!
> * I have made no decisions as to where to output test results,
> diagnostics, etc. Currently, they're simply output to
> document.write().
Output them to a Results object which, by default, sends the output to
document.write() but allows the user to redirect the output.
On Apr 7, 2005, at 12:19 PM, Fergal Daly wrote:
Were you aware of JsUnit?
http://www.edwardh.com/jsunit/
Yes, it's in the "See Also" section of my docs.
I prefer the Test::More style of testing most of the time. I count
myself
lucky I've never had to use a testing framework for javascript!
I guess
Were you aware of JsUnit?
http://www.edwardh.com/jsunit/
I prefer the Test::More style of testing most of the time. I count myself
lucky I've never had to use a testing framework for javascript!
F
On Thu, Apr 07, 2005 at 11:23:59AM -0700, David Wheeler wrote:
> Greetings fellow Perlers,
>
> I'
On Apr 7, 2005, at 11:32 AM, Christopher H. Laco wrote:
OK, now whos gonna build JPANTS? :-)
JSPANTS, you mean? I think we need a CJSPAN, first. Alias?
Cheers,
David
David Wheeler wrote:
Greetings fellow Perlers,
I'm pleased to announce the first alpha release of my port of
TestSimple/More/Builder to JavaScript. You can download it from:
http://www.justatheory.com/downloads/TestBuilder-0.01.tar.gz
Very cool. Very sick. :-)
OK, now whos gonna build JPANTS?
On Apr 7, 2005, at 11:28 AM, Andy Lester wrote:
You are a crazy man.
Best feedback I ever had. Brilliant!
D
On Thu, Apr 07, 2005 at 11:23:59AM -0700, David Wheeler ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
wrote:
> I'm pleased to announce the first alpha release of my port of
> TestSimple/More/Builder to JavaScript. You can download it from:
You are a crazy man.
xoxo,
Andy
--
Andy Lester => [EMAIL PROTECTED] => www.pet
29 matches
Mail list logo
