* Andy Lester <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2007-11-19 23:17]: > I guess I'm not seeing why a deferred plan is better than no > plan at all.
At a minimum, because the harness expects a plan. If you exit prematurely, it can at least detect that no plan was given, whereas if you test without a plan, it knows nothing at all. And beyond that, you still declare intent and the harness can compare with actual behaviour. A buggy set of tests is more likely to align with the count than it might with an up-front plan, but not with complete certainty – whereas if you test without a plan, the harness, once again, knows nothing at all. A deferred plan is clearly not as good as a predeclared plan, but is definitely much safer than no plan at all. Regards, -- Aristotle Pagaltzis // <http://plasmasturm.org/>
