Paul Beckingham wrote: >> I'm with Adrian. Printing out "ok" 100,000 times shouldn't be a >> big deal unless you're reading the TAP via some sort of IP over >> clay tablets protocol. But... > > My test estimate is two orders of magnitude larger, so it actually is a > big deal to capture and store those results. > > But I would like to point out that there is a very low information > density in 100,000 "ok" messages. I was looking to see what folks > thought of an *optional* feature that doesn't bother outputting the "ok" > messages, just the interesting ones. Hence the "sparse". > > The basic idea was that instead of: > > 1..10_000_000 > ok 1 > ok 2 > ... > not ok 123 > ... > ok 10_000_000 > > The output could be collapsed to the following, with no loss of > important information: > > 1..10_000_000 sparse > not ok 123 > > Yes, I could achieve this with grep, sed, Perl etc, but I thought it > might make a nice addition to TAP. > > Paul. > >
I'm in the same boat. Recently, I've started testing my environment when things go wrong. (I blame Andy). I have one test alone that has a test count of 500,000+. That's a lot of oks to be processed, when I only want the ones that didn't pass. Now, add in a few more tests that easily go into the 50,000 range in addition to 'the bi one', and waiting for the test output/TAP to be parsed takes quite a while. Just my $0.02 worth. -=Chris
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
