On Fri, Dec 13, 2002 at 12:16:53AM +0100, Paul Johnson wrote:
> I also had thoughts along the lines of all tests not being equal.
> Generally the earlier a test is run, the more important it is.
This isn't necessarily true.
Test::Class, for example, runs tests in alphabetical order ...
Tony
On Wed, Nov 27, 2002 at 10:35:33PM +, Mark Fowler wrote:
> See also Acme::Test::Buffy (lame example testing module), and
> Test::Builder::Tester for help testing Test::Binary.
We found that for testing Test::Builder objects, it was handy to do
things like:
*orig_ok = \&Test::Builder::ok;
On Mon, Oct 14, 2002 at 05:46:38PM -0400, Michael G Schwern wrote:
> The reason I went with no_plan in Test::Inline was that unlike a dedicated
> test script, a T::I test is cobbled together from a series of seperated
> blocks of tests and it's more difficult than usual to count them all and add
>
On Sun, Oct 13, 2002 at 01:40:39AM +0100, Adrian Howard wrote:
> - In hindsight, having a 1 test default was probably a hangover from
> JUnit thinking... I never really considered any alternatives.
I have to say I like the way this currently is... most of my test
methods only have one test .
On Thu, Oct 10, 2002 at 09:42:05PM +0100, Adrian Howard wrote:
> If you stick your loop inside a BEGIN {} block I think you'll find that it
> works as you expect.
> The attribute handler in Test::Class is set to run as a CHECK block (the
> default provided by Attribute::Handlers). Since you don'
Test::Class helpfully has a shortcut to allow you to run the tests from
multiple classes as if they were one test:
If you want to run multiple test objects in a single script you
can pass "runtests" a list of test objects ... Since you can pass
"runtests" class names instead of objects th
On Tue, Jan 29, 2002 at 10:23:45AM -0500, Shane Landrum wrote:
> > When we first introduced this most of the reviews were for very
> > basic things: you forgot strict or warnings. You didn't untaint that
> > variable. You're not following our coding standards there.
> Ah, ok. So were you just grep
> Mandatory, Managed Code Reviews is basically where each individual
> change is reviewed by another member of the team before being committed.
> We used it at Blackstar (AFAIK they still do, Tony?)
I believe so, but haven't been there for over 6 months now, so I'm not
sure ...
> So if the m
On Sat, Sep 29, 2001 at 01:39:51PM -0400, Michael G Schwern wrote:
> Given Wiki's security model (or lack thereof) that is kinda silly.
It's very deliberate for the Wiki to have approximately zero security...
> I'm poking around a bit at other wikis, maybe TWiki if they didn't
> have such an obn
I've raised this problem with cpan-testers before, to exactly zero
response, but if we're going to start blasting them with lots and lots
of automated messages, it's probably time to again:
cpan-testers does not currently list a PASS/FAIL against a given version
of perl on search.cpan.org - it o
ld be in a distinct method. Never
make methods do too much, especially when you're expecting people to
subclass.
Tony
--
------
Tony Bowden | [EMAIL PROTECTED] | http://www.tmtm.com/
the woods are lovely, dark, and deep
d2 get_foo / set_foo
Accessor and mutator for foo.
Tony
--
------
Tony Bowden | [EMAIL PROTECTED] | http://www.tmtm.com/
make me laugh make me cry enrage me don't try to disengage me
--
(ok, I know there's 0.04 now, but I've deleted that announcement)
The thing I'd *really* like to see in this now is the ability to run
it on arbitrary code - not just installed modules. i.e. I want to add
it to a 'build' process, that will automatically reject code that isn't
fully documented -
llow you to set up your own
local rules for this :)
Tony
--
--
Tony Bowden | [EMAIL PROTECTED] | http://www.tmtm.com/
all history is too small for even me; for me and you,exceedingly too small
--
$ok = @_ == 3 ? ok($test, $name)
: ok($test);
Tony
--
------
Tony Bowden | [EMAIL PROTECTED] | http://www.tmtm.com/
may my mind stroll about hungry and fearless and thirsty and supple
--
On Mon, Aug 20, 2001 at 05:30:26PM -0400, Michael G Schwern wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 20, 2001 at 02:16:37AM +0100, Tony Bowden wrote:
> > In rewriting core tests with Test::More, where can we start?
>
> Everything in lib/. For t/ you'll have to use your judgement. I
> adde
Tony
--
------
Tony Bowden | [EMAIL PROTECTED] | http://www.tmtm.com/
make me laugh make me cry enrage me don't try to disengage me
--
ei.cmu.edu/activities/str/descriptions/mitmpm.html)
This should be fairly simple to implement (I'll leave that as an exercise
for the reader), and could probably be used as a starting point for
CPANTS.
Tony
--
------
18 matches
Mail list logo
