It looks like it's only one level of nesting. Any reason not to go the whole hog with something like
..1 OK 1 ..2 ...1 OK 2 OK 3 ...2 OK 4 ..3 OK5 F On 01/07/06, Michael G Schwern <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
The PITA / TestBuilder2 BOF at YAPC whacked up this TAP extension. Test groups in TAP. There are several use-cases here. 1. I want to name a group of tests rather than the individuals. 2. I don't want to have to count up the total number of tests in my file but I do want the protection of the plan. I'd like to be able to say "I'm going to run 5 tests. I'm going to run 4 more tests. Now 8 more". 3. The spew to STDERR from my code when it does something wrong cannot be associated with a single test. But if I had a test grouping I could associate it with that group. Here's what we came up with. 1..10 ..4 - name for this group ok 1 ok 2 ok 3 ok 4 ..2 - I will call this group Bruce ok 5 ok 6 ..4 ok 7 ok 8 ok 9 ok 10 Pros: * Its backwards compatible. The ..# lines are currently considered junk and ignored. * Its pretty readable. * It solves #1 * Combined with 'no_plan' it solves #2. ..2 ok 1 ok 2 ..3 ok 3 ok 4 ok 5 1..5 * It solves #3. 1..5 ..3 ok 1 Oh god, the hurting oh dear, oh god at Foo.pm line 23 not ok 2 # Failed test ... # got : this # expected: that ok 3 ..2 ok 4 ok 5 Cons?
