Jeffrey Thalhammer wrote:
* Should a test script have a shebang? What should it
be? Any flags on that?
I often see "-t" in a shebang. One downside of the shebang, though, is
that it's not particularly portable. As chromatic said, with "prove"
it's not really necessary. ("prove -t")
* Should a test script make any assumptions about the
CWD? Is it fair/safe for the test script to change
directories?
Anything that affects the file system (particularly creating directories
and files) often needs to change directories as part of the test.
As a side note, I wrote File::pushd to make it easy to change
directories locally in a block and then snap back to where one started.
I find it handy for that kind of testing.
use File::pushd;
{
my $dir = pushd( $some_dir ); # change to $some_dir
# do stuff in $some_dir directory
}
# back to original directory here
# convenient for testing:
{
my $dir = tempd; # change to a temp directory
# do stuff in temp directory
}
# back to original directory and temp directory is gone
* What's the best practice for testing-only libraries?
Where do they go and how do you load them? Is there
a naming convention that most people follow (e.g.
t::Foo::Bar).
I've personally come to like the "t::Foo::Bar" style as it is
immediately obvious that the module in question is test-related. It's a
handy affordance.
Regards,
David Golden
