Adrian Howard wrote at Fri, 28 Feb 2003 11:40:52 +0000:
> I'd argue that Test::Warn isn't the right place :-) To me sending
> output to STDERR and warnings are different things.
Absolutely.
> If added to Test::Warn I'd argue for separate functions. I've had
> situations where warnings were logged, and STDERR was meant for user
> readable output. Having them merged would break some tests of mine (not
> many - I won't be *that* upset if everybody disagrees with me ;-).
>
> I always meant to revisit the idea for Test::Output which was intended
> to be a generic FILEHANDLE output testing module. Allows you to do
> things like:
>
> output_is { hello() } "hello world\n", STDOUT, "hello world";
> output_isnt { hello() } "goodbye", STDOUT, "not goodbye";
> output_unlike { hello() } qr/bye/, STDOUT, "didn't print bye";
> output_like { hello() } qr/hello/, STDOUT, "printed hello";
> like(Test::Output->last, qr/world/, "... and world");
>
> Which (I think) would do all that you need.
>
> (Draft implementation of above at <http://www.quietstars.com/perl/>)
>
> However, I'm not really happy with the above API and haven't had the
> time to think about it in any more detail. Suggestions welcome :-)
Sorry for my late anser,
but I also find the concept of a Test::Handle module for a great idea.
I'm looking forward to the CPAN release.
Greetings,
Janek
