I'm approaching the end of this release cycle. I really want to get
this released.
I've removed the meaningless percentages of tests that have failed.
If you rely on the output at the end, it's different now.
xoa
file: $CPAN/authors/id/P/PE/PETDANCE/Test-Harness-2.57_06.tar.gz
On Sun, Apr 23, 2006 at 11:01:17AM +0200, Marcus Holland-Moritz wrote:
The only thing worth mentioning is that with perl 5.003,
the following happens:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] $ perl5.003 Makefile.PL
Can't locate ExtUtils/Command.pm in @INC at Makefile.PL line 4.
On Sun, Apr 23, 2006 at 11:34:12AM +0200, Marcus Holland-Moritz wrote:
On 2006-04-23, at 02:26:54 -0700, Yitzchak Scott-Thoennes wrote:
On Sun, Apr 23, 2006 at 11:01:17AM +0200, Marcus Holland-Moritz wrote:
The only thing worth mentioning is that with perl 5.003,
the following happens:
On 23 Apr 2006, at 07:02, Andy Lester wrote:
[snip]
I've removed the meaningless percentages of tests that have
failed. If you rely on the output at the end, it's different now.
[snip]
I'll just repeat what I left on Andy's blog here in case anybody
agrees with me.
I don't like the
On Sun, 23 Apr 2006 12:07:18 +0100, Adrian Howard [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
On 23 Apr 2006, at 07:02, Andy Lester wrote:
[snip]
I've removed the meaningless percentages of tests that have
failed. If you rely on the output at the end, it's different now.
[snip]
I'll just repeat what
On 2006-04-23, at 01:02:00 -0500, Andy Lester wrote:
I'm approaching the end of this release cycle. I really want to get
this released.
I've removed the meaningless percentages of tests that have failed.
If you rely on the output at the end, it's different now.
I've run it through a
On 2006-04-23, at 02:49:14 -0700, Yitzchak Scott-Thoennes wrote:
On Sun, Apr 23, 2006 at 11:34:12AM +0200, Marcus Holland-Moritz wrote:
On 2006-04-23, at 02:26:54 -0700, Yitzchak Scott-Thoennes wrote:
On Sun, Apr 23, 2006 at 11:01:17AM +0200, Marcus Holland-Moritz wrote:
The only
Larry Wall wrote:
On the other hand, - makes a pretty pathetic fish operator. So for
the sake of argument, let's keep it = for the moment. But ignoring the
tail leads us to the head end of the fish. What do we do about $ARGS?
We could say this:
=$fh : *$fh :: = : *
Now if you
Author: autrijus
Date: Sun Apr 23 08:02:50 2006
New Revision: 8917
Modified:
doc/trunk/design/syn/S02.pod
Log:
* S02: The *() form now means *($/).
* Clarified that $() etc are term-level macros.
Modified: doc/trunk/design/syn/S02.pod
On 2006-04-23, at 02:26:54 -0700, Yitzchak Scott-Thoennes wrote:
On Sun, Apr 23, 2006 at 11:01:17AM +0200, Marcus Holland-Moritz wrote:
The only thing worth mentioning is that with perl 5.003,
the following happens:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] $ perl5.003 Makefile.PL
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Automated smoke report for 5.9.4 patch 27938
kirk: Intel(R) Celeron(R) CPU 2.00GHz (GenuineIntel 1994MHz) (i686/1 cpu)
onlinux - 2.6.15-20-386 [debian]
using cc version 4.0.3 (Ubuntu 4.0.3-1ubuntu5)
smoketime 17 hours 54 minutes (average 1 hour 7
Author: autrijus
Date: Sun Apr 23 09:07:38 2006
New Revision: 8918
Modified:
doc/trunk/design/syn/S04.pod
Log:
* S04: the stop-parsing-on-bare-block rule for conditionals:
if -e { say exists } { extra() }
has also to stop parsing on pointies:
if -e - $x { say exists } { extra() }
Larry Wall skribis 2006-04-22 19:40 (-0700):
Hmm, I almost never write scalar FH because I very rarely want to
input a single line in list context. But leaving that aside...
I've used it a lot.
I do tend to use it less often as I move away from line based text
documents for storage.
[101
On 4/23/06, H.Merijn Brand [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sun, 23 Apr 2006 12:07:18 +0100, Adrian Howard [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
On 23 Apr 2006, at 07:02, Andy Lester wrote:
[snip]
I've removed the meaningless percentages of tests that have
failed. If you rely on the output at the
Anybody knows who is the TPF responsible for SoC?
Thank you
Alberto
--
Alberto Simões - Departamento de Informática - Universidade do Minho
Campus de Gualtar - 4710-057 Braga - Portugal
Alberto Simões wrote:
Anybody knows who is the TPF responsible for SoC?
You can contact us with any questions at [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Thank you
Alberto
--
Alberto Simões - Departamento de Informática - Universidade do Minho
Campus de Gualtar - 4710-057 Braga - Portugal
Given the recent explosion of svn commits in the synopses, and the fact that
the versions of the synopses on the dev.perl.org/perl6 site are lagging a
bit, would it make sense to add a link to the svn site to the
Synopses page?
I'd rather not.
The ones on the dev site shouldn't have been
On 23/04/06, Steve Peters [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
What's happening above is that TEST cannot handle seeing tests come in
out of order, while harness can. I'm scanning Test::Harness::TAP a bit,
but it seems to be unspecified whether this is OK or not. Should TEST
care if the tests are reported
On Sunday 23 April 2006 15:08, H.Merijn Brand wrote:
On Sun, 23 Apr 2006 12:07:18 +0100, Adrian Howard [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
On 23 Apr 2006, at 07:02, Andy Lester wrote:
[snip]
I've removed the meaningless percentages of tests that have
failed. If you rely on the output at the
On Sunday 23 April 2006 12:05, Shlomi Fish wrote:
This debate demonstrates why a plugin system is necessary for a test
harness.
No, it demonstrates why a well-defined test output protocol is useful.
-- c
On Sunday 23 April 2006 22:35, chromatic wrote:
On Sunday 23 April 2006 12:05, Shlomi Fish wrote:
This debate demonstrates why a plugin system is necessary for a test
harness.
No, it demonstrates why a well-defined test output protocol is useful.
I agree that a well-defined test output
Regarding my SoC proposal, received as answer from [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
We are not accepting proposals for mentors.
If you have an idea for a student proposal. you can write it up
similar to other ideas on the 'ideas' page, and the committee will
probably decide to list it there.
Now, the
On Sunday 23 April 2006 12:46, Shlomi Fish wrote:
I agree that a well-defined test output protocol is useful. However, are
you implying that assuming we have that, one can write several different
test harnesses to process such test outputs? (I'm just guessing.)
No.
Wouldn't that imply
On Sun, Apr 23, 2006 at 01:02:00AM -0500, Andy Lester wrote:
I'm approaching the end of this release cycle. I really want to get
this released.
Tests pass. One not numeric warning:
t/00compile.ok 1/6Argument 2.57_06 isn't numeric in subroutine
entry at t/lib/Test/More.pm line 670
[guest - Sat Apr 22 18:25:09 2006]:
The attached patch implements and tests divide by zero exceptions for
BigInt and Complex PMCs.
It also tests divide by zero exceptions for float PMCs. float and
integer PMCs are already properly handling divide by zero.
Thanks, applied.
Jonathan
On Sun, Apr 23, 2006 at 01:02:00AM -0500, Andy Lester wrote:
I'm approaching the end of this release cycle. I really want to get
this released.
I've removed the meaningless percentages of tests that have failed.
If you rely on the output at the end, it's different now.
xoa
On Sunday 23 April 2006 23:11, chromatic wrote:
On Sunday 23 April 2006 12:46, Shlomi Fish wrote:
I agree that a well-defined test output protocol is useful. However, are
you implying that assuming we have that, one can write several different
test harnesses to process such test outputs?
Will Coleda schrieb:
There was an agreement on 5.6.1 a few weeks back on IRC, if I recall
correctly, I haven't heard anything about 5.8.
This change was made here:
r11744 | bernhard | 2006-02-26 05:55:39 -0500 (Sun, 26 Feb 2006) | 7
lines
Configuration:
- Sprinkle a few 'use warnings;'
Hi,
Andy, I know you subscribe to perl-qa so I didn't CC.
These two patches add support for detecting cycles in code
references, using PadWalker, to Devel::Cycle and Test::Memory::Cycle.
Currently this will silently stop working if PadWalker is not
installed to keep things tidy - I personally
Oops, bad patch.
I added lib/Test/Memory/Cycle.pm as a symlink so that I don't have
to 'make' each time to run the tests.
--
Yuval Kogman [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://nothingmuch.woobling.org 0xEBD27418
pgpb5Xz3jyQ6k.pgp
Description: PGP signature
Moin,
On Sunday 23 April 2006 23:08, Shlomi Fish wrote:
On Sunday 23 April 2006 23:11, chromatic wrote:
On Sunday 23 April 2006 12:46, Shlomi Fish wrote:
I agree that a well-defined test output protocol is useful.
However, are you implying that assuming we have that, one can write
Shlomi Fish wrote:
On Sunday 23 April 2006 22:35, chromatic wrote:
On Sunday 23 April 2006 12:05, Shlomi Fish wrote:
This debate demonstrates why a plugin system is necessary for a test
harness.
No, it demonstrates why a well-defined test output protocol is useful.
I agree that a
On Sunday 23 April 2006 15:46, Michael Peters wrote:
How about a good TAP parser module that does nothing but parse TAP. Then
it could be used in all kinds of test harness permutations.
That's exactly what I want and precisely why I think a well-defined TAP is
more important than a plugin
David H. Adler wrote:
Tests pass. One not numeric warning:
t/00compile.ok 1/6Argument 2.57_06 isn't numeric in subroutine
entry at t/lib/Test/More.pm line 670
This is the same warning I reported in an earlier message:
http://groups.google.com/group/perl.qa/msg/fee69dde25cf42ec
This is the same warning I reported in an earlier message: http://
groups.google.com/group/perl.qa/msg/fee69dde25cf42ec
Given the wise counsel of a former Phalanx strategos (every
warning your test suite throws is a bug which must be tracked
down), I spent several hours looking at this
On Sun, Apr 23, 2006 at 04:14:01PM -0400, David H. Adler wrote:
On Sun, Apr 23, 2006 at 01:02:00AM -0500, Andy Lester wrote:
I'm approaching the end of this release cycle. I really want to get
this released.
Tests pass. One not numeric warning:
Of course, I forgot to mention: Perl
36 matches
Mail list logo
