On 24 Apr 2006, at 15:51, Shlomi Fish wrote:
[snip]
Am I missing something or isn't that what
Test::Harness:Straps/Test::Run::Straps are for? If not, I suppose I
can
extract a class out of Test::Run::Straps that will provide a
reusable TAP
parser.
[snip]
In addition to Michael's and
chromatic wrote:
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
Michael Peters wrote:
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
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'm not attached to percentages, which I wasn't looking
On 23 Apr 2006, at 20:05, Shlomi Fish wrote:
[snip]
This debate demonstrates why a plugin system is necessary for a
test harness.
If it has it, then one can write a plugin to control whether or not
percentages are displayed. So for example, you can install a plugin
that does
that, and put
On Monday 24 April 2006 01:46, Michael Peters wrote:
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
Shlomi Fish wrote:
On Monday 24 April 2006 01:46, Michael Peters wrote:
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
On Monday 24 April 2006 07:56, Michael Peters wrote:
Not only would this make it easier to have a harness look for something
other than TAP (maybe some other protocol from some other language) but
it also means I can parse test runs after they've been run on a
completely different machine
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
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
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
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
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
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?
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
30 matches
Mail list logo