On 7/28/06, via RT David Romano <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
# New Ticket Created by "David Romano"
# Please include the string: [perl #39997]
# in the subject line of all future correspondence about this issue.
# <URL: http://rt.perl.org/rt3/Ticket/Display.html?id=39997 >
I've updated the documentation for p5rx.t as well as moved the signifiers for
skipping or todo'ing a file to the appropriate lines in re_tests. I have also
updated p5rx.t to use all (960) tests in re_tests, marking tests as TODO or
SKIP as needed. The sixth column in re_tests is now a description of the
test.
thanks for the effort! however, i don't want to apply this patch as it
is. 're_tests' was stolen directly from perl5's test suite. the idea
is that the test data this file contains is
implementation-independent. therefore, if some other crazy person
(besides patrick) wants to implement yet another perl5 regex engine,
they can use the same test data file, and a harness that is particular
to their implementation.
so, i think it's best to keep the information as to which tests are
todo and which are skip out of the test data file. currently, this
information exists in the test harness, 'p5rx.t', as i think this is
the best place to capture it. i'm glad to see you've expanded the pge
p5 tests to the full 900+ tests in the file, and i'll gladly apply a
patch that does this while leaving the 're_tests' file intact.
while i'm thinking about it, there should be a better way to reflect
todo or skip reason. if you're up for the challenge, it would be nice
to be able to say something like
my %todo= ( # similar for skip
'not yet implemented' => qw< 5 12 35 500 >,
'broken' => qw< 34 63 11 >,
...
);
and have something that decorates the subtests appropriately. that's
not a requirement for the resubmission of your existing patch, but an
extra request. if it doesn't get done this time around, it will
eventually ;)
~jerry
