Hi Martin, I found this draft message lying in my editor - don't know if I ever sent it off. If not, sorry.
jas. Martin Raspe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > If I put a "print $@" after each eval and run the test separately then > it passes ok ... > > D:\Src\XML-Xerces-2.3.0-3> perl t/schema.t > > 1..3 > ok 1 - module loaded > ok 2 > ok 3 > FATAL ERROR: > FILE: FAKE_SYSTEM_ID > LINE: 41 > COLUMN: 6 > MESSAGE: Expected end of tag 'personnel' > at t/schema.t line 50 This is correct, why should adding the print suddenly make the test run correctly, though? > Handling Unknown exception, <IN> chunk 1. > # Looks like your test died just after 3. > > (I'm not sure if the last two lines are correct.) Yes, this seems to happen if exceptions get thrown, the perl test harness gets unhappy sometimes. > >>It seems the error code somehow gets lost or overwritten when the > >>$error object is referenced again. If you reverse the arguments in the > >>"ok" clause as follows it passes the test: > >> > >>ok($error->getCode() == $XML::Xerces::XMLExcepts::URL_NoProtocolPresent > >>&& > >>UNIVERSAL::isa($error,'XML::Xerces::XMLException') > >>&& > >>$error); > > > That will be a big problem for handling exceptions - the above code > > will die if the error isn't an exception object... > > Yes, I just wanted to show that the code is returned correctly if > called first. Understood. > May be the reason is that the exception handling code itself raises > an exception. Yes, it does seem to be happening. jas. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
