Thanks for the responses. I have indeed started to look at Test::Class.
A major point raised here about Test::Unit is that it doesn't integrate with Test::Builder, which I hadn't considered.
Another issue is that because TU so closely matches jUnit it is "less Perlish", and I think that is true. For example, TU stops running tests as soon as one test fails, which is the "nUnit way", while the "Perl way" is to run all tests and simply report failures.
The difference between the "Perl way" and the "nUnit way" interesting one, with no "right answer", I think.
The nUnit way reflects the emphasis of Test Driven Development where you want all your tests passing all the time and when one fails you do "just enough" programming to make the test pass. If you are not doing TDD then always running all the tests makes more sense to me.
Some of the attraction of Test::Unit for me was/is how closely it matches JUnit. At the time I got interested in TU I was working with a group that did both Perl and Java programming and I was trying to get them to create more unit tests.
In light of what I've read here I'm going to try using Test::Class and think more about this.
Thanks again, Matisse ------------------------------------------------------- Matisse Enzer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://www.matisse.net/ - http://www.eigenstate.net/
