Re: How to mangle system time for testing

On 28 Dec 2005, at 16:36, Javier Amor Garcia wrote: Hello, i am testing a module for a web application and i need to test the expiration of sessions. The problem is that i can not modify the expiration time and i not want to make sleep the test for the full length of expiration time (a hour)

Re: Set binmode on T::B's File Handles?

On 9 Jan 2006, at 05:03, David Wheeler wrote: [snip] Is there any way to get Test::Builder to set an I/O layer on its file handles? [snip] Y'want Test::Builder's failure_output(), e.g.: use Test::More tests => 1; binmode Test::More->builder->failure_output, ':utf8'; diag "\x{201c}"; ok 1; C

Re: [OT] TDD + Pair Programming

Hi all, On 2 Apr 2006, at 01:04, Jeffrey Thalhammer wrote: I have never actually had an opportunity to practice this, but I've always felt that the most obvious way to combine test-driven development with pair programming was to have one person write test code while the other person writes appl

Re: Non-Perl TAP implementations (and diag() problems)

On 19 Apr 2006, at 09:02, Ovid wrote: [snip] From a parser standpoint, there's no clean way of distinguishing that from what the test functions are going to output. As a result, I really think that "diag" and normal test failure information should be marked differently (instead of the /^# / tha

Re: Use case testing of Web apps with Perl?

On 19 Apr 2006, at 17:12, Andrew Gianni wrote: [snip] We'd like to be a bit more programmatic about writing our mech tests to test use-case driven test-cases. I'm wondering if there are any tools or ideas out there to ease the process so we don't have to manually write the numerous mech tests

Re: Non-Perl TAP implementations (and diag() problems)

On 20 Apr 2006, at 16:55, Michael Peters wrote: [snip] I'm not sure I agree that there is a difference between them. They are both comments output by the tests. Just because one comes from the testing routine used by the test and the other from the test itself doesn't mean they aren't both just

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

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

On 23 Apr 2006, at 20:05, Shlomi Fish wrote: [snip] This debate demonstrates why a plugin system is necessary for a test harness. If it has it, then one can write a plugin to control whether or not percentages are displayed. So for example, you can install a plugin that does that, and put t

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

On 24 Apr 2006, at 15:51, Shlomi Fish wrote: [snip] Am I missing something or isn't that what Test::Harness:Straps/Test::Run::Straps are for? If not, I suppose I can extract a class out of Test::Run::Straps that will provide a reusable TAP parser. [snip] In addition to Michael's and chroma

Re: Running individual unit tests with Test::Class???

[apologies to andrew for a dupe - didn't notice it went to perl-qa] On 31 May 2006, at 14:35, Andrew Gianni wrote: Let me start by admitting that I don't know a whole lot about xUnit testing. In fact, using Test::Class is really my first exposure to the idea, so perhaps I'm asking for somethi

Re: TAP extension proposal: test groups

On 1 Jul 2006, at 23:38, Michael G Schwern wrote: Cons? * Doesn't handle nested groups - but I have to admit that's a use case I've never wanted :-) * Doesn't handle groups with an undefined number of tests. The obvious solution would be to allow ".." sans numeric suffix so you would

Re: TAP::Harness

On 1 Jul 2006, at 20:36, Michael G Schwern wrote: [snip] * How can I help? Provide use cases, what would you want to do with Test::Harness if you could? What are you doing with Straps? What features do other testing systems (JUnit, for example) have that you'd like to see in Perl? Once I pos

Re: TAP extension proposal: test groups

On 3 Jul 2006, at 13:56, Adam Kennedy wrote: That seems like a problem too but the one I'm trying to get at is 4 no plan, with groups If your script exits prematurely after one of the groups, the harness will not notice because everything looks just fine. The solution to this is not to use

Re: TAP extension proposal: test groups

On 3 Jul 2006, at 17:47, Ovid wrote: - Original Message From: Michael G Schwern <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> * Its backwards compatible. The ..# lines are currently considered junk and ignored. Is this behavior documented anywhere? [snip] From Test::Harness::TAP Anything else Any output

Re: Lessons from the test function parameter placement quibbles?

On 17 Jul 2006, at 12:49, Ovid wrote: - Original Message From: A. Pagaltzis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [snip] And you know what? We don’t even need Test::More::NextGen to implement that. All functions as they stand could unambiguously accept a hashref as their single argument. That's goin

Re: RFC - Class::Agreement

On 23 May 2005, at 15:33, Ian Langworth wrote: I'm working on a new module, Class::Agreement, and I've started by writing the documentation. If anyone has a few minutes, I'd like some feedback as to whether my descriptions of the concepts make sense and if you like the syntax. HTML: http://re

Re: RFC - Class::Agreement

On 27 May 2005, at 16:21, Ian Langworth wrote: [snip] When you say "automatic," I think of source filtering. Do you simply mean an alias for the first argument? If so, I think it's best to leave that up to the programmer. You can always use shift. Fair enough. I just hate having the duplicatio

Re: RFC - Class::Agreement

On 27 May 2005, at 18:25, Ovid wrote: --- Ian Langworth <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Reflecting upon this, I'm not even sure why I'd want argument modification as a feature. (Maybe I still had Hook::LexWrap on the brain.) I might just take this out. I vote for taking it out. I view contract

Re: Test::Object

On 31 May 2005, at 09:47, Adam Kennedy wrote: [snip] Something exist already that I'm missing? [snip] I'd use Test::Class (but I would say that :-) So the example from your POD would be something like: { package Foo::Test; use base qw( Test::Class ); use Test::More; # w

Re: Module::Build::TestReporter 1.00 Preview

On 30 May 2005, at 22:23, chromatic wrote: [snip] I'd love to have feedback before I release it to the CPAN in a week or so. [snip] Getting some test failures on vanilla OS X 10.4.1 (see below). Not got time to dig into causes at the moment. Looks nice though. Like the roles stuff. Adrian

Re: Module::Build::TestReporter 1.00 Preview

On 2 Jun 2005, at 10:01, Michael G Schwern wrote: [snip] Test::More 0.48_02 introduced a change where it would put a leading newline before its diagnostics when running under Test::Harness. Looks like the test expected that. You're probably running Test::More 0.47. [snip] Bah. I knew that

Re: ANN: JavaScript Test.Simple 0.10

On 24 Jun 2005, at 06:27, David Wheeler wrote: [snip] See Test.Harness.Browser in action here: http://www.justatheory.com/code/Test.Simple-0.10/tests/index.html http://www.justatheory.com/code/Test.Simple-0.10/tests/index.html? verbose=1 Sweet! It probably says something quite sad about

Re: AnnoCPAN and a wiki POD idea

On 8 Jul 2005, at 20:08, Adam Kennedy wrote: [snip] There's no way to get a listing of the annotations for a given author id, or even for a given dist. So I'm reduced to manually looking through a thousand odd web pages to find potential changes or improvements to the code. [snip] htt

Re: Need to talk to an EU patent attorney

On 12 Jul 2005, at 22:00, Michael G Schwern wrote: Barbie's journal, via Ovid, made me aware of patent EP1170667 "Software Package Verification" granted last month in the EU. http://gauss.ffii.org/PatentView/EP1170667 [snip] Oh for f**k's sake :-( Don't know any patent lawyers myself, but it

Re: Need to talk to an EU patent attorney

On 12 Jul 2005, at 23:07, Adrian Howard wrote: [snip] Don't know any patent lawyers myself, but it might be worth dropping a line to one or more of: http://www.nosoftwarepatents.com/en/m/about/contact.html http://fsfeurope.org/ [snip] http://www.eurolinux.org/ also might be

Re: Test harnesses?

On 25 Jul 2005, at 22:29, Peter Kay wrote: http://qa.perl.org/test-modules.html has a bunch of test modules listed. However, there are no harnesses listed. I know Test::Harness, and I'm going to go read about Test::Builder, but what other "meta-testing" modules are there? [snip] All depend

Test::Builder::STDOUT ?

I've been pondering custom test runners recently and have hit the familiar problem of Test::Harness::Straps not capturing STDERR, so missing the diagnostics that Test::Builder outputs. A moderately evil solution occurred, and I now have a Test::Builder::STDOUT on my box that just does:

Re: Test::Builder::Module

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

Re: Test::Builder::STDOUT ?

On 29 Jul 2005, at 06:07, Michael G Schwern wrote: BEGIN { *STDERR = *STDOUT } That'll handle anything, Test::Builder or not. Nope. T::H::S turns analyse_file( 'foo.t' ) into something like open(FILE, "/usr/bin/perl foo.t|" ) so the test script will get it STDERR disassociated from

Re: Test::Builder::STDOUT ?

On 29 Jul 2005, at 02:58, chromatic wrote: If you can use your own test harness, use Test::Harness::Straps::analyze() or Test::Harness::Straps::analyze_fh() to collect STDERR and STDOUT from the tested process. Ah. That would make sense. Much more sensible. Off to play. Adrian

Test::Harness::Straps - changes?

Earlier today chromatic kindly gave me a gentle tap with the cluestick which let me figure out how to give T::H::S STDERR & STDOUT, which means my mates test results are now toddling off to a SQLite database quite happily. However, munging together my own command together with various _pr

Re: Test::Builder::STDOUT ?

On 30 Jul 2005, at 00:00, Michael G Schwern wrote: [snip] Perhaps you misunderstand. I did I mean to put that BEGIN { *STDERR = *STDOUT } in the test script. foo.t never prints to STDERR. Doh. I would have to put in in a module so I could shim it in with HARNESS_PERL_SWITCHES but yes,

Re: Test::Harness::Straps - changes?

On 30 Jul 2005, at 01:05, Andy Lester wrote: On Fri, Jul 29, 2005 at 03:57:07PM -0700, Michael G Schwern ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: This is, IMHO, the wrong place to do it. The test should not be responsible for decorating results, Test::Harness should be. It means you can decorate ANY te

Re: Test::Harness::Straps - changes?

On 30 Jul 2005, at 17:19, chromatic wrote: (BTW chromatic: I'm curious why you didn't break todo tests into separate passing/failing classes as you did the "normal" test?) TAP doesn't, so I didn't see any reason to do it. Well, I don't really see that TAP separates pass/fail todo tests any

Re: GC API from discussion

On 15 Aug 2005, at 02:13, David Formosa ((aka ? the Platypus)) wrote: After a very fruitful discussion I've rewritten my suggested GC API. Comments please. [snip] I'm speaking from complete ignorance since I've only been vaguely following the subject... but four additional things that strike

Re: GC API from discussion

On 15 Aug 2005, at 13:17, Yuval Kogman wrote: On Mon, Aug 15, 2005 at 12:40:05 +0100, Adrian Howard wrote: [snip] 1) Some way of declaring objects as being "fixed" so we can pass them to external code without having to worry about the GC moving them around. A handle to an obj

Sébastien

On 15 Aug 2005, at 17:12, Yitzchak Scott-Thoennes wrote: [snip] The throw_ok { ... } syntax only works because the throw_ok sub exists and has a prototype that specifies a subref is expected; if you don't load Test::Exception by the time the throw_ok call is compiled, it is parsed as an indirect

Re: GC API from discussion

On 16 Aug 2005, at 18:14, Yuval Kogman wrote: On Mon, Aug 15, 2005 at 15:59:34 +0100, Adrian Howard wrote: I'm not sure what you're proposing here. A separate arena for stuff you want to allocate and not be moved by the GC? How would I tell the compiler? You won't, the l

Re: Sub::Uplevel

On 9 Sep 2005, at 21:55, David Golden wrote: At least one of the culprits may be Test::Exception, for any version before 0.20. The problem is that CPANPLUS doesn't currently play well with Module::Build and doesn't respect the "build_requires" parameter, but only looks at the "requires"

Re: Using environment variables to control long running tests

On Sunday, June 1, 2003, at 08:43 am, Andrew Savige wrote: Merlyn's use perl journal of April 29, 2003: http://use.perl.org/~merlyn/journal/ suggests using environment variables to spare the installer of CPAN modules a long wait while running 'make test'. One reply noted that DBD, HTML::Mason an

Re: [ANNOUNCE] Test::Warn::None 0.02

On Tuesday, June 24, 2003, at 07:53 pm, Michael G Schwern wrote: On Tue, Jun 24, 2003 at 12:07:19PM +0100, Fergal Daly wrote: Consider the following. use Test::More; use Test::Warn::None; plan tests => 42; To make this work I'd have to overhaul the internal Test::Builder planning sy

Re: blocks and subplans again

I could throw up a Wiki somewhere if people think it would be useful (I've been looking for an excuse to play with CGI::Kwiki). (IRC is to scary a time sink for me ;-) Adrian On Wednesday, June 25, 2003, at 07:14 pm, Fergal Daly wrote: On Wednesday 25 June 2003 17:56, Andy Lester wrote: This

Re: [ANNOUNCE] Test::Warn::None 0.02

Hiya, On Wednesday, June 25, 2003, at 07:09 pm, Fergal Daly wrote: On Wednesday 25 June 2003 17:49, Adrian Howard wrote: The thread from the start of May about having optional / extendable plans supported by Test::Harness would seem to be a good match for this feature. http

Re: [ANNOUNCE] Test::Warn::None 0.02

On Monday, June 30, 2003, at 02:07 pm, Fergal Daly wrote: On Wednesday 25 June 2003 20:15, Adrian Howard wrote: Add an explicit "test script finished" footer? But how does the footer-adder know that the correct number of tests ran. You would need to declare a plan to run x additional

Re: Blurring the line between assertions and tests

On Friday, August 1, 2003, at 09:07 pm, Michael G Schwern wrote: [snip] I was thinking about inline testing, Test::Class and such and how it would be nice if we could just write test functions right in our code, like assertions. Like Carp::Assert::More, but I want all the Test:: stuff available.

Re: Blurring the line between assertions and tests

On Saturday, August 2, 2003, at 01:03 am, Michael G Schwern wrote: Class::Contract has always bothered me as way too much Kool-Aid to drink in one sitting. I completely agree. Having the ability to apply pre/post/invariant functionality to normal Perl classes has been on my to do list for years

Re: Existing books on testing?

On Friday, August 15, 2003, at 06:49 pm, Kurt Starsinic wrote: [snip] Worth being familiar with. Very practical. If anybody knows a good book on Junit (if there is such a thing, HHOS), I would love to know about it. "Unit Testing in Java: How Tests Drive the Code" by Johannes Link & Peter F

Re: Scrutinizing CPAN distributions (was Testing for valid path names...)

On Monday, August 18, 2003, at 05:31 pm, Tels wrote: I didn't even know that cpanratings exists! Wow! But why, by Seline Moonbow, does this site need a login just to show me a rating? Taken a look at search.cpan.org recently then? For example: http://search.cpan.org/author/MBARBON/Module-Info-

Re: Existing books on testing?

On Tuesday, August 19, 2003, at 02:24 pm, Adam Turoff wrote: [snip] In _Software Craftsmanship_, Pete McBreen has high praise for: The Craft of Software Testing Brian Marick Prentice Hall It's out of print and nearly impossible to find. I haven't read it yet, so I can't

Re: blocks and subplans again

On Wednesday, August 20, 2003, at 11:52 am, Michael G Schwern wrote: [snip] I've yet to see a real use-case for plans of plans. [snip] Anywhere when you want to have plans at a higher level of granularity than a test script. For example in Test::Class I can say: sub pig_flying : Test(2) {

Re: Existing books on testing?

Three I would thoroughly recommend, although not Perl related in any way, are: Lessons Learned in Software Testing: a Context-driven Approach   Cem Kaner, James Bach Publisher: John Wiley & Sons Inc; ISBN: 0471081124 Testing Extreme Programming  

Re: blocks and subplans again

On Thursday, August 21, 2003, at 08:17 pm, Michael G Schwern wrote: On Thu, Aug 21, 2003 at 02:38:03PM +0100, Fergal Daly wrote: [snip] You could allow extensions at any time but then you lose the ability to know if you ran 4 + 2 tests or 5 + 1, Not if you introduce an end tag (though I'd rather

Re: blocks and subplans again

On Thursday, August 21, 2003, at 11:50 pm, Michael G Schwern wrote: On Thu, Aug 21, 2003 at 10:19:35PM +0100, Fergal Daly wrote: [snip] Also you can allocate a sub block to each thread and you don't have to worry about it's output getting confused with the output of any other thread because ever

Re: Hello

On 21 Jan 2005, at 17:09, Andy Lester wrote: On Fri, Jan 21, 2005 at 05:00:09PM +, GlennH ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: I read about the Phalanx project on the yahoo Agile Testing group and thought I'd sign up the mailing list and skulk in the background. I'm a Do you have a mention of what was

Whither the perl-qa wiki ?

I've just noticed that the perl-qa wiki linked from http://qa.perl.org/ is still toast. I seem to remember somebody (Andy ?) saying that a something-or-other.kwiki.org was in the process of being set up to replace it. Is my terrible memory playing it's usual tricks or has it popped into existe

Re: Whither the perl-qa wiki ?

My impression was that was for Phalanx people, rather than perl-qa in general ? Adrian On 31 Jan 2005, at 18:10, Shawn Carroll wrote: http://phalanx.kwiki.org/ On Mon, 31 Jan 2005 14:51:22 +, Adrian Howard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: I've just noticed that the perl-qa wiki linked

Re: Whither the perl-qa wiki ?

On 31 Jan 2005, at 21:18, Michael G Schwern wrote: On Mon, Jan 31, 2005 at 04:07:04PM -0500, Michael G Schwern wrote: So I may as well do that now. Done. Let me know if that seems like its the right database, there were several to choose from owing to circumstances. Fantastic - I'll go have a pok

Re: hello all

On 1 Feb 2005, at 16:30, Shaun Fryer wrote: [snip] Hello! Hello right back at ya :-) Adrian

Re: Test::Unit, ::Class, or ::Inline?

Belated response... On 26 Jan 2005, at 20:18, Michael G Schwern wrote: On Mon, Jan 24, 2005 at 04:11:56PM -0500, Ian Langworth wrote: I'm taking a software development class this semester which will involve writing extensive object-oriented code. My partner and I are trying to decide whether to us

Re: Test::Unit, ::Class, or ::Inline?

On 7 Feb 2005, at 21:13, Michael G Schwern wrote: On Mon, Feb 07, 2005 at 03:03:29PM +, Adrian Howard wrote: Test::Unit, as mentioned by Curtis, has been abandoned. Has it? I thought that the folk on [EMAIL PROTECTED] had taken it on ? http://groups.yahoo.com/group/PerlUnit/ shows some

Re: Testing What Was Printed

On 11 Feb 2005, at 19:52, Shawn Sorichetti wrote: [snip] I've started working on Test::Output that is based on Schwern's TieOut module that comes with Test::More. I'm hoping to have it released on CPAN later tonight. Test::Output is a self contained so that it can be included with other modules

Online testing course materials

While not exactly Perl related Cem Kaner & James Bach are in the process of putting up all of the course material for their "Black Box Software Testing". Lots of interesting material. for those who've not come across it already. Cheers, Adrian

Re: Talk: Why You Really Want To Write Tests

On 4 Mar 2005, at 17:15, Michael G Schwern wrote: [snip] There's not nearly enough references, particularly when I expect the audience to go out and work things out on their own. I still can't think of a decent testing book nor tutorial to recommend. Test::Tutorial leaves the reader at a dead

Re: Talk: Why You Really Want To Write Tests

On 22 Mar 2005, at 19:11, Michael G Schwern wrote: On Tue, Mar 22, 2005 at 06:28:21PM +, Adrian Howard wrote: I can't believe you didn't stick a reference to the perl-qa list there :-) The audience was not Perl programmers. Primarily Haskell and Java. A few people expressed intere

Re: TestSimple/More/Builder in JavaScript

On 7 Apr 2005, at 19:23, David Wheeler wrote: Greetings fellow Perlers, I'm pleased to announce the first alpha release of my port of TestSimple/More/Builder to JavaScript. You can download it from: http://www.justatheory.com/downloads/TestBuilder-0.01.tar.gz [snip] You rock! Excellent stuff. O

Re: TestSimple/More/Builder in JavaScript

On 7 Apr 2005, at 20:27, David Wheeler wrote: [snip] Besides, I'm sure that Adrian will soon take my code to port Test::Class to JavaScript, and then we can have both approaches! ;-) I did once hack JSUnit to output TAP - so you never know :-) Adrian

Re: Test automation with perl.

On 13 Apr 2005, at 09:27, suresh babu wrote: I need some example projects(not web applications) which uses perl to develop test suites and automate testing requirements. May be some pointers or source forge where i can get information on such projects. Most things on CPAN will have a Perl test su

Re: Test::Expect

On 14 Apr 2005, at 11:36, Leon Brocard wrote: Oh, I forgot to mention to perl-qa that I wrote Test::Expect: http://search.cpan.org/dist/Test-Expect/ It's nice. Already used it :-) Adrian

Re: Test automation with perl.

On 14 Apr 2005, at 08:43, suresh babu wrote: Hi Experts, I would like to reiterate my request. [snip] Did you not read the replies? http://www.nntp.perl.org/group/perl.qa/4079 http://www.nntp.perl.org/group/perl.qa/4081 Adrian

Re: Kwalitee and has_test_*

On 17 Apr 2005, at 11:09, Tony Bowden wrote: On Sun, Apr 17, 2005 at 08:24:01AM +, Smylers wrote: Negative quality for anybody who includes a literal tab character anywhere in the distro's source! Negative quality for anyone whose files appear to have been edited in emacs! Ow! Coffee snorted do

Re: Kwalitee and has_test_*

On 17 Apr 2005, at 13:47, David A. Golden wrote: [snip] 2) A metric to estimate the quality of a distribution for authors to compare their work against a subjective standard in the hopes that authors strive to improve their Kwalitee scores. In this model, faking Kwalitee is irrelevant, because

Re: Module and package version numbering

On 18 Apr 2005, at 17:03, David Cantrell wrote: [snip] Number::Phone::UK::Data - no version, this is where the .0004 comes from though. It has no version number because the entire file is generated from a *really* dumb

Re: Module and package version numbering

On 19 Apr 2005, at 11:40, David Cantrell wrote: [snip] The script that generates it doesn't change. The data that it mangles into a module is the bit that changes. Can you add a version number to the data? So I'll take the suggestion of putting MMDD into a version number. But then wasn't the

Re: [ANNOUNCE] Test::Simple/More/Builder 0.59_01

On 27 Apr 2005, at 06:03, Michael G Schwern wrote: [snip] This finally allows one to create a second Test::Builder object via Test::Builder->create. Authors of modules which test testing modules may now rejoice, you can use Test::Builder to test Test::Builder! Neato! Adrian

Re: verbose diagnostics

On 28 Apr 2005, at 14:23, Paul Johnson wrote: Using Test::More, I would like to send some diagnostics to be seen only when the harness is running in verbose mode. [snip] diag "some verbose diagnostics" if $ENV{TEST_VERBOSE}; ? Adrian

Fwd: [agile-testing] ANNOUNCE: New version of Perl port of Fit.

Since it seems to have been announced everywhere but here, I thought folks might be interested in this. Adrian Begin forwarded message: From: Tony Byrne <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: 28 April 2005 09:52:09 BST To: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [agile-testing] ANN

Re: ANN: JavaScript TestSimple 0.03

On 4 May 2005, at 01:14, David Wheeler wrote: On May 3, 2005, at 14:27 , Joe McMahon wrote: Here's a weird idea: how about the option of AJAXing the test harness results back to a receiving server somewhere that understands TAP? Bingo: TAP testing of JS embedded in web pages in its native habitat

Re: Test::Builder change BAILOUT -> BAIL_OUT

On 3 May 2005, at 23:36, Michael G Schwern wrote: Test::Simple/More/Builder 0.61 will introduce a change to Test::Builder whereby the BAILOUT() method becomes BAIL_OUT(). Additionally Test::More finally features a BAIL_OUT() function. [snip] Just out of curiosity - any particular reason for the c

Re: ANN: JavaScript TestSimple 0.03

On 5 May 2005, at 18:00, David Wheeler wrote: On May 5, 2005, at 04:26 , Adrian Howard wrote: Here's a weird idea: how about the option of AJAXing the test harness results back to a receiving server somewhere that understands TAP? Bingo: TAP testing of JS embedded in web pages in its n

Re: Duplicated code

On 19 Apr 2004, at 21:03, Ovid wrote: As part of our refactoring project, we'd like to find duplicated code. Our hand-rolled scripts do a decent job, but could use a lot of work. Rather than do a lot of work, I'm curious to know if anyone knows of any tools already out there for that. Any su

Re: Temporarily Overriding subs

On 25 May 2004, at 18:31, Ovid wrote: [snip] So I wrote a little module, Sub::Override, to do that for me. I can replace subs, explicitly restore them to their original value or just let the object fall out of scope and have the subs automatically restored. However, this seems like such an obvi

Re: empty tests, Test::Harness, and Test::Inline

On 11 Jun 2004, at 19:16, Andrew Pimlott wrote: [snip] 1. pod2test exits with status 1 when there are no tests. This is simple to work around, and you could argue that pod2test is right to throw up a flag for this degenerate case, but I actually think it is more useful to accept it

Re: C/C++ White-Box Unit Testing and Test::More

On 24 Jun 2004, at 07:09, Piers Cawley wrote: [snip] The xUnit style framework does a much better job of enforcing test isolation than Test::More does (but you have to remember that what Test::More thinks of as a test, xUnit thinks of as an assertion to be used *in* a test). To be fair to Test::Mor

Re: C/C++ White-Box Unit Testing and Test::More

On 24 Jun 2004, at 20:19, Andrew Pimlott wrote: On Thu, Jun 24, 2004 at 05:08:44PM +0100, Adrian Howard wrote: Where xUnit wins for me are in the normal places where OO is useful (abstraction, reuse, revealing intention, etc.). Since you've thought about this, and obviously don't believ

Re: C/C++ White-Box Unit Testing and Test::More

On 24 Jun 2004, at 21:41, Ovid wrote: [snip] I also like the thought of inheriting tests, but I know not everyone is fond of this idea. There was a moderately interesting discussion about this on Perlmonks: http://www.perlmonks.org/index.pl?node_id=294571 [snip] Yeah, I meant to contribute to tha

Re: C/C++ White-Box Unit Testing and Test::More

On 25 Jun 2004, at 16:10, Andrew Pimlott wrote: [snip] I thought the "isolation" principle that people were talking about is that before every test, a "setup" method is called, and after every test a "teardown" is called, automatically by the test harness. This seems to require one method == one

Re: C/C++ White-Box Unit Testing and Test::More

On 24 Jun 2004, at 21:10, Tony Bowden wrote: On Thu, Jun 24, 2004 at 02:59:30PM -0400, Andrew Pimlott wrote: I see this more as a limitation than a feature. It seems to mean that - You need to use the same setup/teardown for all your tests. Those that need different things aren't testing the same

Re: C/C++ White-Box Unit Testing and Test::More

On 25 Jun 2004, at 20:18, Andy Lester wrote: Repetition is good. I feel very strongly that you should be checking your constructor results in every single test, and checked against literals, not variables. I'm not complaining about repetitive tests, and I agree with what you said about testing co

Re: C/C++ White-Box Unit Testing and Test::More

On 24 Jun 2004, at 19:59, Andrew Pimlott wrote: [snip] - You don't have much control (correct me if I'm wrong) about the order of tests, or the relationship between tests, eg you can't say "if this test fails, skip these others". This is straightforward in Test::More's simple procedural sty

Re: C/C++ White-Box Unit Testing and Test::More

On 25 Jun 2004, at 16:51, Fergal Daly wrote: [snip] NB: I haven't used xUnit style testing so I could be completely off the mark but some (not all) of these benefits seem to be available in T::M land. Just so I'm clear - I'm /not/ saying any of this is impossible with T::M and friends. That's obv

Re: C/C++ White-Box Unit Testing and Test::More

On 26 Jun 2004, at 12:51, Fergal Daly wrote: On Fri, Jun 25, 2004 at 10:13:52PM +0100, Adrian Howard wrote: [snip] What xUnit gives you is a little bit more infrastructure to make these sorts of task easier. That's fair enough but that infrastructure is just extra baggage in some cases. True

Re: [ANNOUNCE] Test::Simple 0.48_02

On 19 Jul 2004, at 07:25, Michael G Schwern wrote: [snip] There's a new feature. When run under Test::Harness diagnostic output will throw in a leading newline for better readability. [snip] Which causes anything testing test diagnostic output with Test::Builder::Tester to fall over. Test::Class

Re: [ANNOUNCE] Test::Simple 0.48_02

On 19 Jul 2004, at 20:30, Mark Fowler wrote: On Mon, 19 Jul 2004, Adrian Howard wrote: My temptation is to say the new behaviour is the right one and patch T::B::T and friends? The version of TBT in my subversion repository[1] now twiddles the HARNESS_ACTIVE ENV variable off when it's colle

Little lost wiki...

The Perl QA Wiki linked to from as eventually ends up as a 403 at . Dead or just resting? Adrian

Re: Little lost wiki...

On 1 Aug 2004, at 21:46, Andy Lester wrote: The Perl QA Wiki linked to from as eventually ends up as a 403 at . Probably dead, because Ingy was to set up qa

Re: Test::Harness with modules that output to STDOUT

On 24 Aug 2004, at 16:04, Peter Kay wrote: I am attempting to write tests (using whichever Tests::...) for a module that will use Test::Harness. The module outputs to STDOUT (it just does). You might find http://www.mail-archive.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]/msg01690.html of interest. [snip] So far,

Re: Test::More and 'deep' tests

On Tuesday, Sep 9, 2003, at 10:52 Europe/London, Tony Bowden wrote: [snip] 1) ok $str1 eq $str2; 2) is $str1, $str2; 3) is_deeply [$str1], [$str2]; 4) is_deeply $str1, $str2; All should pass as far as I am concerned. The Test::More deeply behaviour matches my intuitions, and I would have tests th

Re: passing arguments to tests

On Thursday, Sep 11, 2003, at 16:38 Europe/London, Ovid wrote: --- Andrew Savige <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Oh, that 'grind' looks like a very handy command but I'm a bit confused about how you use it. Is it just a handy general-purpose command or do you use it specifically as part of "make te

Re: Phalanx / CPANTS / Kwalitee

On Wednesday, Oct 15, 2003, at 11:09 Europe/London, Rafael Garcia-Suarez wrote: Thomas Klausner wrote: there are currently 4 dists on CPAN that only include a configure script (makepp-1.19, glist-0.9.17a10, swig1.1p5, shufflestat-0.0.3) 179 do not include any of Makefile.PL, Build.PL or configu

Re: Trying to spear a phalanx shield for pod

On Friday, Oct 24, 2003, at 14:23 Europe/London, Andrew Savige wrote: I'm about to add a POD test program to my phalanx distro. Before I do that, just want to check I'm using the best model. I plan on using the one from WWW::Mechanize (shown below) -- unless someone can suggest a better model. [sn

  1   2   >