--- "Clayton, Nik" wrote:
> Andrew Savige wrote:
> > 2) A uniform mechanism for test programs to handle command line
> > arguments would be nice. For example:
> >
> > int main(int argc, char* argv[])
> > {
> > tap_init(argc, argv); /* mythical new tap function */ // ...
> > }
> >
> > Some possible command line arguments are:
> > -v verbose
> > -d debug
> > -t give timing information (via ANSI C clock() function, say)
>
> Isn't that more the province of the harness that's running the tests?
> Like prove(1)?
Yeah, you're right. Sorry, I wasn't up-to-date with the latest
petdance goings on when I first responded. (Googling for TAP
protocol didn't help much, but I finally uncovered this:
<http://use.perl.org/~petdance/journal/22057>).
That said, when writing my xUnit-style C++ unit test suite, I found
it handy to provide hooks to tweak the behaviours of individual test
programs outside of the driver. In particular, I wanted to provide
timing information at a finer level of granularity than provided by
the driver (e.g. prove).
/-\
Find local movie times and trailers on Yahoo! Movies.
http://au.movies.yahoo.com
