Re: Send me unusual "make" error strings for CPAN::Reporter

2006-09-29 Thread Jonathan Rockway
> Of course. Locales. It all seemed too easy. > > Time for plan B. Looking for stars might be the best approach: GNU make reports failure: > template.l: In function `yylex': > template.l:38: error: syntax error before '%' token > gmake: *** [template] Error 1 BSD make errors out like this: >

Re: Send me unusual "make" error strings for CPAN::Reporter

2006-09-29 Thread David Golden
On 9/29/06, Jonathan Rockway <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: I don't have nmake around to see what that does... NMAKE : fatal error U1077: 'C:\WINDOWS\system32\cmd.exe' : return code '0xff' Stop. "Error" is a common string, but only in English :/ I think the "tee" mechanism needs to be rethough

Re: Testing for test labels

2006-09-29 Thread A. Pagaltzis
* Adrian Howard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2006-09-29 14:21]: > If I had a big pile of tests without descriptions I wouldn't > want them dying either. PERL5OPT=-MTest::EnsureDescriptions=:nonfatal ? Regards, -- Aristotle Pagaltzis //

TAP 2.0

2006-09-29 Thread Ovid
Hi all, Schwern and I have been discussing TAP 2.0 and barring objections, we like the diagnostic syntax proposed in http://perl-qa.yi.org/index.php/TAP_diagnostic_syntax. However, there's one area that we're less clear on and the following two suggestions are bantered about: not ok 1 - diff

Re: TAP 2.0

2006-09-29 Thread David E. Wheeler
On Sep 29, 2006, at 16:00, Ovid wrote: There are all sorts of little details there, but basically, got/expected (or whatever names are settled on) are to be free-form text. The main question is whether or not those forms are HERE docs or follow a pseudo-YAML convention). I find the YAML ve

Re: TAP 2.0

2006-09-29 Thread Michael Peters
David E. Wheeler wrote: > On Sep 29, 2006, at 16:00, Ovid wrote: > >> There are all sorts of little details there, but basically, >> got/expected (or whatever names are settled on) are to be free-form >> text. The main question is whether or not those forms are HERE docs or >> follow a pseudo-Y

Re: TAP 2.0

2006-09-29 Thread jerry gay
On 9/29/06, Ovid <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: got: this is line 1 this is line 2 this is line 3 expected: this is line 1 this is line b this is line 3 i prefer this syntax, as it's easier to parse in languages without builtin he

Re: TAP 2.0

2006-09-29 Thread Pete Krawczyk
Subject: TAP 2.0 From: Ovid <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Fri, 29 Sep 2006 16:00:22 -0700 (PDT) }got: <