--- Michael G Schwern <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Ovid wrote: > > So we have this: > > > > not ok 2 #--- > > - > > line: 17 > > test: ok $foo; > > ... > > Why do you keep putting everything in an array?
Doesn't have to be an array. That was a "Hungry Man TAP Dinner Serving Suggestion" (for non-US folks, never mind. It wasn't funny anyway). > > How do you mark that as a TODO test? > > > > not ok 2 # TODO don't know what $foo is #--- > > > > Anyone see a problem with that? > > not ok 2 #--- > line: 17 > code: ok $foo; > directive: TODO > reason: don't know what $foo is > ... > > Although that loses compatibility with older parsers in that you > can't mark a test as TODO both ways. I remember when I mentioned marking 'passing TODO tests as failures' and you objected to me breaking the tool chain. I finally realized (I'm slow) you were right and dropped that idea. With your suggestion, if someone has a new TAP producer and and old TAP consumer, this could break the toolchain, too, since the TODO test would be considered a failure when it's not. Cheers, Ovid -- Buy the book -- http://www.oreilly.com/catalog/perlhks/ Perl and CGI -- http://users.easystreet.com/ovid/cgi_course/
