Thanks, I'm going to give D::D::S a try, as I think it'll do what I'm
looking for. Since I'm testing a subroutine that returns a data-structure
(that happens to contain code-refs), I really don't care about the return
values of the code-refs because those are tested elsewhere (through testing
the c
On 5/30/06, chromatic <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Tuesday 30 May 2006 12:08, Nicholas Perez wrote:
> Why not compare signatures? Is that not feasible?
Which signatures? Is it important that the code comes from the same place
(check the CV properties) or that the code has bound to the same le
On Tuesday 30 May 2006 12:08, Nicholas Perez wrote:
> Why not compare signatures? Is that not feasible?
Which signatures? Is it important that the code comes from the same place
(check the CV properties) or that the code has bound to the same lexicals
(PadWalker) or that the lexicals are in th
On 5/30/06, Andrew Gianni <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
The trick is what does "equal" mean for code refs?
If you want to test that the code refs are functionally equivalent, call
them with various arguments and test the results.
If you want to test that the code the code refs refer to is equivale
On 5/30/06, Andrew Gianni <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I have a subroutine that populates a hash of arrays with coderefs by
calling
closures. I'm trying to call Test::More::is_deeply to compare two
structures
that should be identical and I'm running into trouble. When none of the
closures take arg
