Recently, I believe we decided that {} should, as a special case, be
an empty hash rather than a do-nothing code, because that's more
common.
However, what do we do about:
while $x-- && some_condition($x) {}
Here, while is being passed a hash, not a do-nothing code. Should we
force people t
For some variety, you might want to take a look at the JavaScript
implemention of the Test::* family, which we managed to build
asyncronous testing into, so you can do things like onTimeout
pseudo-threads that will happen asyncronously from your main testing.
Now granted, that doesn't deal wit
Here's a scenario we have here at Yahoo!.
The code we're testing depends on XML feeds from backend servers, which
may sometimes be overloaded and not respond. The frontend servers work
around this, but it would be better if we could fail a test, wait a
bit, then go back and run it again a f
On Wed, Dec 21, 2005 at 10:25:09AM -0800, Randal L. Schwartz wrote:
> > "Uri" == Uri Guttman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> Uri> i will let damian handle this one (if he sees it). but an idea would be
> Uri> to allow some form ofkey extraction via a closure with lazy evaluation
> Uri> of the
> "RLS" == Randal L Schwartz writes:
> "Uri" == Uri Guttman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Uri> i will let damian handle this one (if he sees it). but an idea would be
Uri> to allow some form ofkey extraction via a closure with lazy evaluation
Uri> of the secondary (and slower) key.
> "Uri" == Uri Guttman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Uri> i will let damian handle this one (if he sees it). but an idea would be
Uri> to allow some form ofkey extraction via a closure with lazy evaluation
Uri> of the secondary (and slower) key.
I still don't see that. I understand about the l
> "RLS" == Randal L Schwartz writes:
> "Uri" == Uri Guttman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Uri> sorting in p6 is not at all like in p5. instead of coding up an explicit
Uri> comparison code block and duplicating all the key access code (for $a
Uri> and $b), you will specify how to extr
> "Uri" == Uri Guttman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Uri> sorting in p6 is not at all like in p5. instead of coding up an explicit
Uri> comparison code block and duplicating all the key access code (for $a
Uri> and $b), you will specify how to extract/generate each key for a given
Uri> record. t
On 12/21/05, via RT Justin Koser <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> # New Ticket Created by Justin Koser
> # Please include the string: [perl #37997]
> # in the subject line of all future correspondence about this issue.
> # https://rt.perl.org/rt3/Ticket/Display.html?id=37997 >
>
>
> Hello Parrot hac
