On Tue, Jun 24, 2003 at 12:37:36PM +0100, Fergal Daly wrote: > Also how about calling it Test::Warn::Auto? I'm not particularly happy with > None,
Test::Warn::Auto doesn't say anything about its main purpose: to ensure that you have no warnings. Instead it documents an implementation detail, that the check for no warnings is automatic. I like Test::Warn::None or some variation on it. Or even Test::NoWarnings. Doesn't have to sit in the Test::Warn namespace. -- You're the sickest teenager I've ever set my wallet on.
