On Mon, Jun 30, 2008 at 12:54:29PM -0400, Jerry D. Hedden wrote: > Jerry D. Hedden wrote: > > From what I can tell, there are well over a dozen dual-lived > > modules that incorporate test.pl into their distributions. > > Rather than continuing this trend, I would like to propose > > turning it into a module and dual-lifing it to CPAN. > > Nicholas Clark wrote: > > Why are they using it, rather than something built from > > Test::Builder? What does it offer that Test::Builder > > derived modules don't? > > Jerry D. Hedden wrote: > > In my case of dual-lifing threads, threads::shared, > > Thread::Queue and Thread::Semaphore, it was because the > > tests were already written to use test.pl. Thus, adding it > > to the distribution was easier than rewriting all the tests.
But, logically, those tests in the modules in core can be re-written to not use it [if, see below] > > I would imagine that is also the case for the other > > dual-lived modules that use test.pl, but their maintainers > > could have other reasons. Anybody? > > Additionally, test.pl has certain functionality (e.g., > fresh_perl() and watchdog()) not found in the Test::* > modules. hence I think that a better solution would be to add just that code to a Test::Builder based module, either a new one, or an existing one if its maintainer is keen. The core's test.pl is meant to be a subset of the Test::More functionality for core regression tests in t/* (distinct from tests in lib/* for modules shipped with core). To me it feels like scope creep if it also ends up dual- lived. It also means that we would have *two* core-supported test frameworks, which can't be used in the same test. Nicholas Clark
