On Thu, Jul 08, 2004 at 08:59:38PM +0100, Fergal Daly wrote: > On Thu, Jul 08, 2004 at 01:59:35PM -0400, Michael G Schwern wrote: > > Likely you'd control if you wanted this behavior with > > HARNESS_PERL_SWITCHES=-MTest::AutoDebug > > > > This can be implemented, currently, by adding a post hook onto > > Test::Builder->ok() with Hook::LexWrap or Sub::Uplevel. I'm considering > > future versions of Test::Builder to offer some sort of event subscriber > > system so people can more easily do this sort of thing. > > The debugger thing sounds very nice but rather than event hooks, why not use > OO.
With inheritence, only one variant can be used at a time. With event subscribers, lots of variants can be used at a time. Consider what happens when you want to use Test::AutoDebug and a hypothetical module which colors failure diagnostics. If they're both implemented as their own Test::Builder subclasses only one can be in operation at a time. With an event model they're just hooking into the existing object and can both be informed of an event and take whatever action they like. -- Michael G Schwern [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.pobox.com/~schwern/ "That's what Jagulars always do," said Pooh, much interested. "They call 'Help! Help!' and then when you look up they drop down on you."
