Hi Mark, >________________________________ > From: Mark Stosberg <m...@summersault.com>
>As I looked more at Test::Class::Moose, one thing I really like is that >plans are completely gone. Thank you. You're welcome. They're inferred at the suite and class level, but with an implicit "done_testing()" for each method. It's not perfect, but there alternatives seemed a touch worse. >Two questions: > >1. About this: "use Test::Class::Moose;" > >Why not standard inheritance to add Test::Class functionality? > >It looke the rationale here is to save a line of boilerplate with the >"use Moose" line. Test::Class::Moose is explicitly coupled with Moose, so having a "use Moose" line is both redundant and error-prone. If it's required and you forget it, oops. I've given you a source of bugs you didn't need. If it's not required, why write it? >2. About this syntax for extending a test class: > use Test::Class::Moose parent => 'TestsFor::Some::Class'; > >why not use standard inheritance in a class, and to extend a class using >test::Class? Or could you 'extends' in the import list here to look more >Moose-y? I think "extends" might be better. Good call. I don't use standard inheritance because the various solutions for that don't allow for both inheriting from a class and exporting functions (in this case, ok(), is(), eq_or_diff(), and so on). Cheers, Ovid -- Twitter - http://twitter.com/OvidPerl/ Buy my book - http://bit.ly/beginning_perl Buy my other book - http://www.oreilly.com/catalog/perlhks/ Live and work overseas - http://www.overseas-exile.com/
