Ovid wrote:
--- David Wheeler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Test.Simple—JavaScript. It looks and acts just like tap, although in
reality it's tracking test results in an object rather than scraping
them from a print buffer.
http://openjsan.org/doc/t/th/theory/Test/Simple/
Tracking the results in an object is a better choice than scraping from
a print buffer. One of the frustrating issues with Perl's testing
tools is the limited flexibility we have due to reading the output from
STDOUT.
The TAP output should really just be for humans. It should also be
reconfigurable, but obviously we can't do that because Test::Harness
would choke.
I disagree.
I think one of the key strengths of TAP, as opposed to most other
testing systems out there, is that the test results are language-agnostic.
It means we can do things like using a Perl Harness to hit web pages
built by PHP-generated TAP output.
Or mix tests for multiple languages in a single environment/system/dist.
Certainly a more robust grammar could be useful, and an EBNF grammar
sounds wonderful.
Adam K
Since it looks like we're going to stick with reading information from
a print buffer, we should at least publish an EBNF grammar for the
output. (Interestingly, if we did that, we could potentially
incorporate that into Test::Harness and allow folks to provide their
own grammars and thus structure the output to better suit their needs.
Of course, I would like a Ponie with that, too).
Cheers,
Ovid
