On Fri, Mar 11, 2005 at 03:40:41PM -0700, Jim Cromie ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: > I think this is open to interpretation, at least its not specifically > excluded in > http://www.petdance.com/random/tap.html#skipping_tests
Eeek, let's not refer to that any more. http://search.cpan.org/dist/Test-Harness/lib/Test/Harness/TAP.pod instead. I agree w/Schwern on not overloading skip_all. skip_rest is the way to go. Also, it would need to be explicit the difference between a skip_rest and a bail_out. -- Andy Lester => [EMAIL PROTECTED] => www.petdance.com => AIM:petdance
