On Mon, 2004-02-02 at 15:46, Adrian Howard wrote: > However, I was wondering if anybody else ever wanted to do this sort of > thing and, if so, would a more generic API to the test name be useful - > e.g. localising something like $Test::Builder::Test_name? > > If so, I can probably be persuaded to write a patch - if not I'll shut > up and go away :-)
I'd rather print less if I don't really care what the name is, though I don't feel exceedingly strongly that way. It just seems that a default test name is there only to have a test name, not because it provides any useful information. People should use test names if they make the tests easier to understand and to maintain, not because people should use test names. Again, I don't feel very strongly about it. I might be overlooking another benefit. -- c
