On 7/20/06, Michael Peters <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> What benefit would that give? plan() is nice because it provides protection >> against you test script exiting prematurely. > > <stating the obvious> > The exact same benefit as doing a 'plan' at the > beginning, except this would work for scripts that don't know how many tests > they are going to run in advance. <stating-the even-obviouser> If your script exists prematurely then your deferred plan will not be called, hence, no protection.
When something like
>>> use Test::More tests => 'defer';
was emitted, it would mean the test *should* tell the plan at the end. If it doesn't, it is a failure. I don't think this is no protection. It may be an improvement to 'no_plan' in certain circumstances.
