On Fri, Jul 29, 2005 at 02:56:53PM +0100, Adrian Howard wrote:
> >Calling builder() is safer than Test::Builder->new as it is forward
> >compatible for a day when each module will be able to have its own
> >Test::Builder object rather than the strict singleton it is now.
> [snip]
>
> In that c
On Fri, Jul 29, 2005 at 09:06:48AM -0400, Geoffrey Young wrote:
> Michael G Schwern wrote:
> > What I'm looking for is ideas about more things it could do that would
> > be useful for most testing libraries. What scaffolding do module authors
> > find themselves implementing?
>
> if there were
On 29 Jul 2005, at 11:31, Michael G Schwern wrote:
I've just implemented the oft requested Test::Builder::Module. Its a
superclass for all Test::Builder based modules that implements an
import()
method to match what Test::More does and a builder() method to get the
Test::Builder object.
N
Michael G Schwern wrote:
> What I'm looking for is ideas about more things it could do that would
> be useful for most testing libraries. What scaffolding do module authors
> find themselves implementing?
if there were a better way to do this:
push @ISA, qw(Test::Harness::Straps);
$Test:
