David Golden wrote:
>
> I think this is a coverage vs correctness distinction. The idea that
> I was trying to convey is that while these expressions use a boolean
> operator for a shortcut, they aren't really about truth vs. falsity
> of the overall expression, *except* when they are being used
> I'm wondering if I'm the only one who would love to see
> Devel::Cover::Regex? [...] I think this would be a very useful
> extension to Devel::Cover, although I imagine that it's pretty tricky
> to do. Even figuring out how to display the results might be tough
> to do well.
It's not a solution
Gabor Szabo wrote:
>
>> $x{foo} ||= 1;
>
> I have not tested you recent patch. That might have solved this one
> too as this is very similar.
>
> $a = func() || croak("we have some problem");
Actually, that's quite different.
> According to Devel::Cover the above statetement has 3 states. On
> The first thing I noticed after using Devel::Cover was how much output
> it generates. The HTML files depicting the line-by-line status of the
> coverage are enormous.
I assume you're talking about the large amount of data reported and not
the actual file sizes? The "HTML files are massive" p
Tony Bowden <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 17, 2004 at 04:21:09PM +, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>>
>> The HTML is well formed, though, which should make building a filter
>> easy if you know how the formatting works. ;) e.g.:
>
> Or applying an XSLT file to it?
The HTML reports are r
Tony Bowden wrote:
>
> One other interesting idea I had, although I have no idea how
> practical it is at all really, it to have some way of telling from the
> Devel::Cover reports (or otherwise) what tests aren't actually adding
> any value as the stuff they're testing is already adequately te
Tim Bunce <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Michael Carman wrote:
>>
>> I tried it, and it does help some. In my very unscientific test[1] it
>> ran about 20% faster. The size of the db file (on disk) was about 75%
>> smaller.
>
> Thanks. 20% is certainly useful.
I ran some more tests, some of whic
Tim Bunce <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 28, 2003 at 02:37:29PM +, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>>
>> I ran some more tests, some of which might be more significant:
"Paul Johnson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
>>
>> [snipped Devel::Cover metrics]
>
> Thanks. This is interesting.
> Was this using all the coverage criteria?
Looking back at my test harness... no, it's just the "heavy" stuff that
I find most useful: statement, branch, an
Is there a way to nest usage of Test::Harness? I have an application
with a number of custom modules. I want to structure my test suite this
way:
myapp.t
module_a.t
module_b.t
module_a.t
foo.t
bar.t
module_a.t
baz.t
quux.t
That is,
10 matches
Mail list logo
