On Wed, Mar 30, 2011 at 5:58 AM, Ovid <publiustemp-perl...@yahoo.com> wrote: > ________________________________ >> From: Jozef Kutej <jo...@kutej.net> >> To: perl-qa@perl.org >> Sent: Wed, 30 March, 2011 7:54:21 >> Subject: Re: Conditional tests - SKIP, die, BAILOUT >> : >> : >> perl -le 'use Test::More tests => 2; ok(1) or die; ok(1);' >> perl -le 'use Test::More tests => 2; ok(0) or die; ok(1);' > > > True, but advantage of using Test::Most is that not only do you not have to > add > the "or die" to every test which might potentially fail, but you get the most > common testing functionality as determined by analyzing what testing modules > people were actually using (by running code against my minicpan installation).
Plus, with the "or die" approach, you can only mimic Test::Most's "die on fail" capability, whereas the "bail on fail" capability is far more useful, IMHO. Plus plus, with the "or die" approach, you're _always_ dying on fail. With Test::Most, you can activate that by changing one line of code, or (even better) by setting an environment variable and not changing any code at all. > At this point, I would suggest that Test::More might be for code that you put > on > the CPAN (assuming you don't want to force dependencies on people), but I'd > never want to do without Test::Most for personal code. Agree 100%. -- Buddy
