On Monday 14 January 2008 02:27:56 Ovid wrote: > --- chromatic <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > How is this simpler than 'bail on fail' or 'die on fail'? > > It doesn't conflate "output TAP results from tests" with "interpret > > TAP results from tests". > Neither does "die on fail". > "Die on fail" doesn't violate that in the slightest because it's the > *tests* and Test::Builder which determines what TAP is output and how > the tests behave. > Now if I have a test suite which takes 45 minutes to run and I get a > failure 3 minutes into that, it's not an *insane* idea to say "hey, > let's stop the test suite and not tie up my resources for another 42 > minutes". I agree, but Test::Builder doesn't run test *suites*. Test::Builder doesn't *run* anything. To solve organizational problems of a test suite, address it at the level of code that manages the entire suite. -- c
