Hi Robert, thanks for the feedback. I have a couple of questions:
* Robert Collins wrote on Sun, Mar 20, 2011 at 05:10:16AM CET: > TAP is an extremely simple protocol, and the extensions to it to > support things like not needing to maintain the count of tests, > additional debug data and so on are pretty rudimentary. subunit, which > I've mentioned before was written after TAP, to solve similar problems > and address the issues in TAP itself. Are TAP and subunit compatible on their common subset? If not, why not? > Unlike TAP subunit supports attachments (binary and text) to tests, Handling of binary data may end up being quite tricky within a restricted Posix environment with only a few tools available. What if a consumer cannot handle them? Is there possibility for graceful fallback? > test naming, tagging, timestamping (permitting robust timing data even > in parallelised or distributed testing). > > Integrating with TAP is basically uninteresting to anyone working in a > high level language: Python, Ruby,Java, C++ etc. Well, Perl is a high-level language too, I'd say. ;-) Thanks, Ralf
