---- Original Message ---- From: Jonathan Rockway <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> This leads me to another question -- what to do about output that the > program prints to STDOUT or STDERR? There are some modules that I use > that insist on C<warn>-ing whenever something weird happens... will > these mess up my tests? (They don't *now*, but that's because > Test::Harness is being overly nice.) >From the discussion here, anything which is not recognized as TAP output is >discarded, so those warnings probably won't matter unless they look like a >test plan or a test line. > What would happen if TAP dictated that TAP output be sent to an extra > filehandle? For example, prove could open filehandle 3, fork the test > process, and collect TAP data on descriptor 3 ... Unless I'm greatly mistaken, the is outside the scope of TAP. TAP is merely a protocal and where it gets written to/read from should be irrelevant. Mandating that would only impose extra overhead. Cheers, Ovid
