Andy Armstrong wrote: > On 4 Dec 2007, at 15:22, Geoffrey Young wrote: >> it would be nice if this were enforced on the TAP-digestion side and not >> from the TAP-emitter side - the coupling of TAP rules within the >> TAP-emitter is what lead to my trouble in the first place. > > > A valid plan - at the beginning or the end - is required by Test::Harness.
yup, I get that. but that has nothing to do with the Test::More errors that started the thread - I ought to be able to use is() functionality to emit into whatever stream I want and not have it complain about missing plans, especially when Test::Harness will catch malformed TAP and complain anyway... if I decide to send it to Test::Harness, which I may not. --Geoff
