On Wed, 16 Mar 2005, John E. Malmberg wrote: > Craig A. Berry wrote: > > > I believe what he's done is taken Perl 5.8.6, merged PathTools 3.05 > > into it and run the core test suite. The before and after results > > he's showing are the core test suite results before and after > > upgrading PathTools. But without detailed results of what's failiing > > and why in the "after" case, I don't know if there's anything we can > > act on. > > What details do you need and how to I get them? > > The is_deeply test when I run it by it self is passing all 22 tests, > however one test is generating some text explaining that it succeeded. > That explanation is not being preceded by "#" characters like I have > noticed on other tests.
$ MCR Sys$Disk:[-]nDBGPerl "-I[-.lib]" "[lib.test.simple.t]is_deeply.t" 1..22 ok 1 - plain strings ok 2 - right diagnostic ok 3 - different types ok 4 - right diagnostic ok 5 - hashes with different values ok 6 - right diagnostic ok 7 - hashes with different keys ok 8 - right diagnostic ok 9 - arrays of different length ok 10 - right diagnostic ok 11 - arrays of undefs ok 12 - right diagnostic is_deeply() takes two or three args, you gave 4. This usually means you passed an array or hash instead of a reference to it at [lib.test.simple.t]is_deeply.t line 131 ok 13 - hashes of undefs ok 14 - right diagnostic ok 15 - scalar refs ok 16 - right diagnostic ok 17 - mixed scalar and array refs ok 18 - right diagnostic ok 19 - deep scalar refs ok 20 - right diagnostic ok 21 - deep structures ok 22 - right diagnostic -John [EMAIL PROTECTED] Personal Opinion Only
