On Tuesday 31 January 2006 12:22, A. Pagaltzis wrote: > I definitely want to be notified automatically of passing TODO > tests, and apparently at least three others care enough to post > about it on this list. Conversely, I’m pretty sure that of those > who don’t *want* it, most simply don’t care, and if this were a > default, very few would actually want to turn this behaviour off. > > All things considered, this seems like a prime candidate for > default behaviour. That’s why I don’t think punting to let- > everyone-roll-their-own is a long-term solution for this one.
Whose default behavior though? Improving prove to show more diagnostics makes a lot of sense to me. It's a developer tool. I've long wanted better failure reporting. Adding more information to the default Test::Harness summary doesn't make sense to me. It's a user tool. It's important to list failures there, as the code might not work right, but unexpected successes? I don't want to have to explain those or the implications; I'm not sure it's useful information for most users. I still think not enough people write their own harnesses, by the way. -- c
