# from David E. Wheeler
# on Thursday 22 January 2009 11:15:
>> That still doesn't imply that we can't somehow count the number of
>> tests
>> with a computer instead of relying on humans to screw it up. If
>> some combination of static analysis and early runtime can come up
>> with a count, then it becomes possible to automatically plan without
>> counting.
>
>There will be loops with tests in them, and the number of iterations
>of the loop will be independent of the code in the test script, making
> it impossible to actually count the number of tests with a computer
> until the tests have actually been run. Which is how no_plan works.
This is true, but Perl 6 is supposed to be a lovely new language with
perhaps the ability to define a function which runs a loop over a block
given an iterator, right? So, if such a function were to treat all of
the blocks contained tests as subtests, one could call this '1' and
merrily carry on with the static counting before having executed
anything.
--Eric
--
Atavism n: The recurrence of any peculiarity or disease of an ancestor
in a subsequent generation, usually due to genetic recombination.
---------------------------------------------------
http://scratchcomputing.com
---------------------------------------------------
