(n Mon, Nov 9, 2009 at 5:11 AM, Ovid <publiustemp-perl...@yahoo.com> wrote: > For the life of me, I can't really see any utility to use_ok() or > require_ok(). Not only are both fragile and a source of strange "action at a > distance" bugs, but the constructs they replace not only work correctly, but
I don't see any problem with require_ok. I've found it useful as a cheap sanity check and don't see the action at a distance problems you imply. Or maybe I just prefer it over the ordinary death message of the module not loading. -- David
