On Tue, 25 Sep 2001, Kirrily Robert wrote:
> But it does! It says something like:
>
> not ok 23
> # Failed test 1 (eval.t at line 69)
> # got: 'blah blah blah'
> # expected: ''
Oops, that's what I get for not actually trying it out.
I guess that's good enough, though I still l
In perl.qa, you wrote:
>>
>> eval { ...code... };
>> is( $@, '' );
>
>Yeah, except that doesn't print out $@ in case of failure. If I'm
>checking that no exception occurs I want to know what the exception is
>when it happens.
But it does! It says something like:
not ok 23
# Failed
On Mon, 24 Sep 2001, Michael G Schwern wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 24, 2001 at 06:42:55PM -0500, Dave Rolsky wrote:
> > +sub eval_ok (&$) {
> > +my ($code, $name) = @_;
> > +
> > +eval { $code->() };
> > +if ($@) {
> > + ok( 0, "$name - $@" );
> > +} else {
> > + ok( 1, $name );
> >
On Mon, Sep 24, 2001 at 06:42:55PM -0500, Dave Rolsky wrote:
> +sub eval_ok (&$) {
> +my ($code, $name) = @_;
> +
> +eval { $code->() };
> +if ($@) {
> + ok( 0, "$name - $@" );
> +} else {
> + ok( 1, $name );
> +}
> +}
The unfortunate problem is this has adverse effect
Ok, forget the last patch. This one incorporates that plus more.
This one also adds an eval_ok function. The idea here is that sometimes
you simply want to try something to see if it works or not. If it fails
it will append the error ($@) after the name of the test.
The reason for these patch