Michael G Schwern wrote: > On Sat, Mar 12, 2005 at 11:41:08PM -0500, Geoffrey Young wrote: > >>well, this syntax doesn't exist in Test::More at the moment (though I >>probably should get around to a patch like I promised) - it's only in >>Apache-Test. > > > For the record, there's no reason why Test::More has to be the one to declare > the plan. Which is to say, given my desire to avoid Test::More from becoming > a feature monolith, the shorter path to usable code is to write up a > Test::Plan module.
sounds like a plan :) I haven't look at the innards in a while, but do you think the infrastructure is there in Test::Builder to support this now? the last time I checked I had to jump through some hoops to get an external plan() call to play nice with everything else. so, if it's there now cool, I'll take on Test::Plan. if it's not, if you could sketch out what you would prefer the internal changes to look like I'll take that route as I play around. --Geoff
