--- 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/

Reply via email to