Test me please: P/PE/PETDANCE/Test-Harness-2.57_06.tar.gz

2006-04-23 Thread Andy Lester
I'm approaching the end of this release cycle. I really want to get this released. I've removed the meaningless percentages of tests that have failed. If you rely on the output at the end, it's different now. xoa file: $CPAN/authors/id/P/PE/PETDANCE/Test-Harness-2.57_06.tar.gz size:

Re: Test me please: P/PE/PETDANCE/Test-Harness-2.57_06.tar.gz

2006-04-23 Thread Yitzchak Scott-Thoennes
On Sun, Apr 23, 2006 at 11:01:17AM +0200, Marcus Holland-Moritz wrote: > The only thing worth mentioning is that with perl 5.003, > the following happens: > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] $ perl5.003 Makefile.PL > Can't locate ExtUtils/Command.pm in @INC at Makefile.PL line 4. >

Re: Test me please: P/PE/PETDANCE/Test-Harness-2.57_06.tar.gz

2006-04-23 Thread Yitzchak Scott-Thoennes
On Sun, Apr 23, 2006 at 11:34:12AM +0200, Marcus Holland-Moritz wrote: > On 2006-04-23, at 02:26:54 -0700, Yitzchak Scott-Thoennes wrote: > > > On Sun, Apr 23, 2006 at 11:01:17AM +0200, Marcus Holland-Moritz wrote: > > > The only thing worth mentioning is that with perl 5.003, > > > the following

Re: Test me please: P/PE/PETDANCE/Test-Harness-2.57_06.tar.gz

2006-04-23 Thread Adrian Howard
On 23 Apr 2006, at 07:02, Andy Lester wrote: [snip] I've removed the meaningless percentages of tests that have failed. If you rely on the output at the end, it's different now. [snip] I'll just repeat what I left on Andy's blog here in case anybody agrees with me. I don't like the

Re: Test me please: P/PE/PETDANCE/Test-Harness-2.57_06.tar.gz

2006-04-23 Thread H.Merijn Brand
On Sun, 23 Apr 2006 12:07:18 +0100, Adrian Howard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On 23 Apr 2006, at 07:02, Andy Lester wrote: > [snip] > > I've removed the meaningless percentages of tests that have > > failed. If you rely on the output at the end, it's different now. > [snip] > > I'll just r

Re: Test me please: P/PE/PETDANCE/Test-Harness-2.57_06.tar.gz

2006-04-23 Thread Marcus Holland-Moritz
On 2006-04-23, at 01:02:00 -0500, Andy Lester wrote: > I'm approaching the end of this release cycle. I really want to get > this released. > > I've removed the meaningless percentages of tests that have failed. > If you rely on the output at the end, it's different now. I've run it throug

Re: Test me please: P/PE/PETDANCE/Test-Harness-2.57_06.tar.gz

2006-04-23 Thread Marcus Holland-Moritz
On 2006-04-23, at 02:49:14 -0700, Yitzchak Scott-Thoennes wrote: > On Sun, Apr 23, 2006 at 11:34:12AM +0200, Marcus Holland-Moritz wrote: > > On 2006-04-23, at 02:26:54 -0700, Yitzchak Scott-Thoennes wrote: > > > > > On Sun, Apr 23, 2006 at 11:01:17AM +0200, Marcus Holland-Moritz wrote: > > > > T

Re: =$fh vs *$fh

2006-04-23 Thread Audrey Tang
Larry Wall wrote: > On the other hand, -<> makes a pretty pathetic fish operator. So for > the sake of argument, let's keep it =<> for the moment. But ignoring the > tail leads us to the head end of the fish. What do we do about $ARGS? > We could say this: > > =$fh : *$fh :: =<> : *<> > >

[svn:perl6-synopsis] r8917 - doc/trunk/design/syn

2006-04-23 Thread autrijus
Author: autrijus Date: Sun Apr 23 08:02:50 2006 New Revision: 8917 Modified: doc/trunk/design/syn/S02.pod Log: * S02: The *() form now means *($/). * Clarified that $() etc are term-level macros. Modified: doc/trunk/design/syn/S02.pod =

Re: Test me please: P/PE/PETDANCE/Test-Harness-2.57_06.tar.gz

2006-04-23 Thread Marcus Holland-Moritz
On 2006-04-23, at 02:26:54 -0700, Yitzchak Scott-Thoennes wrote: > On Sun, Apr 23, 2006 at 11:01:17AM +0200, Marcus Holland-Moritz wrote: > > The only thing worth mentioning is that with perl 5.003, > > the following happens: > > > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] $ perl5.003 Makefile.PL

Re: Smoke [5.9.4] 27938 FAIL(X) linux 2.6.15-20-386 [debian] (i686/1 cpu)

2006-04-23 Thread Steve Peters
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Automated smoke report for 5.9.4 patch 27938 kirk: Intel(R) Celeron(R) CPU 2.00GHz (GenuineIntel 1994MHz) (i686/1 cpu) onlinux - 2.6.15-20-386 [debian] using cc version 4.0.3 (Ubuntu 4.0.3-1ubuntu5) smoketime 17 hours 54 minutes (average 1 hour 7 m

[svn:perl6-synopsis] r8918 - doc/trunk/design/syn

2006-04-23 Thread autrijus
Author: autrijus Date: Sun Apr 23 09:07:38 2006 New Revision: 8918 Modified: doc/trunk/design/syn/S04.pod Log: * S04: the stop-parsing-on-bare-block rule for conditionals: if -e { say "exists" } { extra() } has also to stop parsing on pointies: if -e -> $x { say "exists" } { extra()

Re: =$fh vs *$fh

2006-04-23 Thread Juerd
Larry Wall skribis 2006-04-22 19:40 (-0700): > Hmm, I almost never write "scalar " because I very rarely want to > input a single line in list context. But leaving that aside... I've used it a lot. I do tend to use it less often as I move away from line based text documents for storage. > [101

Re: Test me please: P/PE/PETDANCE/Test-Harness-2.57_06.tar.gz

2006-04-23 Thread demerphq
On 4/23/06, H.Merijn Brand <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Sun, 23 Apr 2006 12:07:18 +0100, Adrian Howard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: > > > > > On 23 Apr 2006, at 07:02, Andy Lester wrote: > > [snip] > > > I've removed the meaningless percentages of tests that have > > > failed. If you rely on th

Re: RFC: Possible SoC Proposal

2006-04-23 Thread Alberto Simões
Anybody knows who is the TPF responsible for SoC? Thank you Alberto -- Alberto Simões - Departamento de Informática - Universidade do Minho Campus de Gualtar - 4710-057 Braga - Portugal

Re: RFC: Possible SoC Proposal

2006-04-23 Thread Alberto Simões
Alberto Simões wrote: Anybody knows who is the TPF responsible for SoC? You can contact us with any questions at [EMAIL PROTECTED] Thank you Alberto -- Alberto Simões - Departamento de Informática - Universidade do Minho Campus de Gualtar - 4710-057 Braga - Portugal

Re: svn links for the Architecture section on the website?

2006-04-23 Thread Robert Spier
> Given the recent explosion of svn commits in the synopses, and the fact that > the versions of the synopses on the dev.perl.org/perl6 site are lagging a > bit, would it make sense to add a link to the svn site to the > Synopses page? I'd rather not. The ones on the dev site shouldn't have be

Re: Smoke [5.9.4] 27938 FAIL(X) linux 2.6.15-20-386 [debian] (i686/1 cpu)

2006-04-23 Thread Rafael Garcia-Suarez
On 23/04/06, Steve Peters <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: What's happening above is that TEST cannot handle seeing tests come in out of order, while harness can. I'm scanning Test::Harness::TAP a bit, but it seems to be unspecified whether this is OK or not. Should TEST care if the tests are reported

Re: Test me please: P/PE/PETDANCE/Test-Harness-2.57_06.tar.gz

2006-04-23 Thread Shlomi Fish
On Sunday 23 April 2006 15:08, H.Merijn Brand wrote: > On Sun, 23 Apr 2006 12:07:18 +0100, Adrian Howard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > wrote: > > On 23 Apr 2006, at 07:02, Andy Lester wrote: > > [snip] > > > > > I've removed the meaningless percentages of tests that have > > > failed. If you rely on the

Re: Test me please: P/PE/PETDANCE/Test-Harness-2.57_06.tar.gz

2006-04-23 Thread chromatic
On Sunday 23 April 2006 12:05, Shlomi Fish wrote: > This debate demonstrates why a plugin system is necessary for a test > harness. No, it demonstrates why a well-defined test output protocol is useful. -- c

Re: Test me please: P/PE/PETDANCE/Test-Harness-2.57_06.tar.gz

2006-04-23 Thread Shlomi Fish
On Sunday 23 April 2006 22:35, chromatic wrote: > On Sunday 23 April 2006 12:05, Shlomi Fish wrote: > > This debate demonstrates why a plugin system is necessary for a test > > harness. > > No, it demonstrates why a well-defined test output protocol is useful. > I agree that a well-defined test ou

Re: RFC: Possible SoC Proposal

2006-04-23 Thread Alberto Simões
Regarding my SoC proposal, received as answer from [EMAIL PROTECTED]: > We are not accepting proposals for mentors. > If you have an idea for a student proposal. you can write it up > similar to other ideas on the 'ideas' page, and the committee will > probably decide to list it there. Now, the

Re: Test me please: P/PE/PETDANCE/Test-Harness-2.57_06.tar.gz

2006-04-23 Thread chromatic
On Sunday 23 April 2006 12:46, Shlomi Fish wrote: > I agree that a well-defined test output protocol is useful. However, are > you implying that assuming we have that, one can write several different > test harnesses to process such test outputs? (I'm just guessing.) No. > Wouldn't that imply du

Re: Test me please: P/PE/PETDANCE/Test-Harness-2.57_06.tar.gz

2006-04-23 Thread David H. Adler
On Sun, Apr 23, 2006 at 01:02:00AM -0500, Andy Lester wrote: > I'm approaching the end of this release cycle. I really want to get > this released. Tests pass. One "not numeric" warning: t/00compile.ok 1/6Argument "2.57_06" isn't numeric in subroutine entry at t/lib/Test/More.pm line 6

[perl #38202] [TODO] divide by zero exceptions for PMCs

2006-04-23 Thread Jonathan Worthington via RT
> [guest - Sat Apr 22 18:25:09 2006]: > > The attached patch implements and tests divide by zero exceptions for > BigInt and Complex PMCs. > > It also tests divide by zero exceptions for float PMCs. float and > integer PMCs are already properly handling divide by zero. > Thanks, applied. Jonat

Re: Test me please: P/PE/PETDANCE/Test-Harness-2.57_06.tar.gz

2006-04-23 Thread Nicholas Clark
On Sun, Apr 23, 2006 at 01:02:00AM -0500, Andy Lester wrote: > I'm approaching the end of this release cycle. I really want to get > this released. > > I've removed the meaningless percentages of tests that have failed. > If you rely on the output at the end, it's different now. > > xoa > >

Re: Test me please: P/PE/PETDANCE/Test-Harness-2.57_06.tar.gz

2006-04-23 Thread Shlomi Fish
On Sunday 23 April 2006 23:11, chromatic wrote: > On Sunday 23 April 2006 12:46, Shlomi Fish wrote: > > I agree that a well-defined test output protocol is useful. However, are > > you implying that assuming we have that, one can write several different > > test harnesses to process such test outpu

Re: What version of perl is required?

2006-04-23 Thread Bernhard Schmalhofer
Will Coleda schrieb: There was an agreement on 5.6.1 a few weeks back on IRC, if I recall correctly, I haven't heard anything about 5.8. This change was made here: r11744 | bernhard | 2006-02-26 05:55:39 -0500 (Sun, 26 Feb 2006) | 7 lines Configuration: - Sprinkle a few 'use warnings;' -

Test::Memory::Cycle (well really Devel::Cycle) - support for closures

2006-04-23 Thread Yuval Kogman
Hi, Andy, I know you subscribe to perl-qa so I didn't CC. These two patches add support for detecting cycles in code references, using PadWalker, to Devel::Cycle and Test::Memory::Cycle. Currently this will silently stop working if PadWalker is not installed to keep things tidy - I personally fe

Re: Test::Memory::Cycle (well really Devel::Cycle) - support for closures

2006-04-23 Thread Yuval Kogman
Oops, bad patch. I added lib/Test/Memory/Cycle.pm as a symlink so that I don't have to 'make' each time to run the tests. -- Yuval Kogman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://nothingmuch.woobling.org 0xEBD27418 pgpb5Xz3jyQ6k.pgp Description: PGP signature

Re: Test me please: P/PE/PETDANCE/Test-Harness-2.57_06.tar.gz

2006-04-23 Thread Tels
Moin, On Sunday 23 April 2006 23:08, Shlomi Fish wrote: > On Sunday 23 April 2006 23:11, chromatic wrote: > > On Sunday 23 April 2006 12:46, Shlomi Fish wrote: > > > I agree that a well-defined test output protocol is useful. > > > However, are you implying that assuming we have that, one can write

Re: Test me please: P/PE/PETDANCE/Test-Harness-2.57_06.tar.gz

2006-04-23 Thread Michael Peters
Shlomi Fish wrote: > On Sunday 23 April 2006 22:35, chromatic wrote: >> On Sunday 23 April 2006 12:05, Shlomi Fish wrote: >>> This debate demonstrates why a plugin system is necessary for a test >>> harness. >> No, it demonstrates why a well-defined test output protocol is useful. >> > > I agree

Re: Test me please: P/PE/PETDANCE/Test-Harness-2.57_06.tar.gz

2006-04-23 Thread chromatic
On Sunday 23 April 2006 15:46, Michael Peters wrote: > How about a good TAP parser module that does nothing but parse TAP. Then > it could be used in all kinds of test harness permutations. That's exactly what I want and precisely why I think a well-defined TAP is more important than a plugin sy

Re: Test me please: P/PE/PETDANCE/Test-Harness-2.57_06.tar.gz

2006-04-23 Thread James E Keenan
David H. Adler wrote: Tests pass. One "not numeric" warning: t/00compile.ok 1/6Argument "2.57_06" isn't numeric in subroutine entry at t/lib/Test/More.pm line 670 This is the same warning I reported in an earlier message: http://groups.google.com/group/perl.qa/msg/fee69dde25cf42ec

Re: Test me please: P/PE/PETDANCE/Test-Harness-2.57_06.tar.gz

2006-04-23 Thread Andy Lester
This is the same warning I reported in an earlier message: http:// groups.google.com/group/perl.qa/msg/fee69dde25cf42ec Given the wise counsel of a former Phalanx strategos ("every warning your test suite throws is a bug which must be tracked down"), I spent several hours looking at this t

Re: Test me please: P/PE/PETDANCE/Test-Harness-2.57_06.tar.gz

2006-04-23 Thread David H. Adler
On Sun, Apr 23, 2006 at 04:14:01PM -0400, David H. Adler wrote: > On Sun, Apr 23, 2006 at 01:02:00AM -0500, Andy Lester wrote: > > I'm approaching the end of this release cycle. I really want to get > > this released. > > Tests pass. One "not numeric" warning: Of course, I forgot to mention: P