Eric Wilhelm wrote:
> # from Michael G Schwern
> # on Tuesday 27 January 2009 18:16:
>
>> For example, if a test program knows that it is going to
>> exit abnormally, even after it has finished emitting TAP according to
>> its plan, it should emit one final "not ok" line before exiting.
>
> So,
>
# from Ovid
# on Wednesday 28 January 2009 07:57:
>> How would such a UI handle situations where all the tests pass, but
>> the plan fails (too many tests, too few tests or a missing plan)? If
>> those become flashing/stripped lines as well, then the current spec
>> works as written. If not, we sh
- Original Message
> From: Gaurav Vaidya
> As I understand it, the idea behind the final 'not ok' isn't as an
> additionally
> failed test, but as a way of forcing the plan to fail. That'll work as long
> as
> you don't have 'N' tests, and exactly 'N-1' tests finish before the suite
Hey,
On Jan 28, 2009, at 5:19 PM, Ovid wrote:
That being said, 'not ok - test exited prematurely' is not terribly
structured and doesn't necessarily let an advanced TAP consumer
present this information any better.
As I understand it, the idea behind the final 'not ok' isn't as an
additiona
Eric Wilhelm wrote:
1. TAP::Harness should store that when archiving?
It would be nice if TAP::Harness::Archive noted the exit code in the meta.yml file included in the
archive.
--
Michael Peters
Plus Three, LP
- Original Message
> From: Eric Wilhelm
> >For example, if a test program knows that it is going to
> >exit abnormally, even after it has finished emitting TAP according to
> > its plan, it should emit one final "not ok" line before exiting.
>
> So,
>
> 1. TAP::Harness should store t
# from Michael G Schwern
# on Tuesday 27 January 2009 18:16:
>For example, if a test program knows that it is going to
>exit abnormally, even after it has finished emitting TAP according to
> its plan, it should emit one final "not ok" line before exiting.
So,
1. TAP::Harness should store that
