On Mon, Aug 15, 2005 at 05:58:23PM +0200, S?bastien Aperghis-Tramoni wrote:
> use strict;
> use Test::More tests => 2;
> use Test::Exception;
> use Net::Pcap;
>
> throws_ok(
> sub { Net::Pcap::lookupdev() },
> '/^Usage: Net::Pcap::lookupdev\(err\)/',
> "calling lookupdev() with no argument"
> );
>
> throws_ok
> { Net::Pcap::lookupdev() }
> '/^Usage: Net::Pcap::lookupdev\(err\)/',
> "calling lookupdev() with no argument"
> ;
> Now, if I move the "use Test::Exception" inside an eval-string and
> execute the new script:
>
> $ perl -W exception.pl
> 1..2
> ok 1 - calling lookupdev() with no argument
> Usage: Net::Pcap::lookupdev(err) at exception.pl line 13.
> # Looks like you planned 2 tests but only ran 1.
> # Looks like your test died just after 1.
>
> Aha! The first test, which uses the normal form of throws_ok() passes,
> but the second one, which uses the grep-like form, fails.
The throw_ok { ... } syntax only works because the throw_ok sub exists
and has a prototype that specifies a subref is expected; if you don't
load Test::Exception by the time the throw_ok call is compiled, it
is parsed as an indirect object call of the "throw_ok" method on the
object or class returned by the {} block:
$ perl -MO=Deparse,-p -we'throws_ok { Net::Pcap::lookupdev() } "/^Usage:
Net::Pcap::lookupdev\(err\)/", "calling lookupdev() with no argument"'
BEGIN { $^W = 1; }
do {
Net::Pcap::lookupdev()
}->throws_ok('/^Usage: Net::Pcap::lookupdev(err)/', 'calling lookupdev() with no
argument');
-e syntax OK
which is perfectly valid perl, but unlikely to do what you want.
