On Wed, Aug 20, 2003 at 03:52:42AM -0700, Michael G Schwern wrote: > On Wed, Aug 20, 2003 at 10:34:08AM +0100, Fergal Daly wrote: > > On Wednesday 20 August 2003 08:23, Michael G Schwern wrote: > > > You don't want subtests to have to know any state, such as how far to > > > indent. Why? Consider: > > > > Something has to keep state > > The state of the overall test? No, that's something which should be > avoided. See below.
> > A plan counts the number of tests and sub-blocks to expect. The 1..8 at the > > end would be calculated by summing the plans of all blocks. > > I've yet to see a real use-case for plans of plans. I don't like no-plans of no-plans. I think that there is the possibility of missing tests not getting spotted. If the outer test is a noplan ok 1 ok 2 ok 3 1..3 ok 1 ok 2 ok ok 1..5 then I think that we miss that test 3 of the nested test failed. Or get confused about which test was the missing test Or if I've got that wrong, I think that we also get confused with 2 adjacent sub tests. ok 1 ok 2 ok 3 1..3 ok ok ok ok ok 1..3 Nicholas Clark
