On Sun, Mar 04, 2001 at 07:57:16PM +0000, Adam Spiers wrote:
> Piers Cawley ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> > Matthew Astley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > > What I'm after is a way to get hold of "debug output from that
> > > module" quickly, without going round uncommenting stuff or
> > > changing constants. I can see there could be some use in (by
> > > default) hiding debug output from any test that passes, but this
> > > still doesn't allow control of the fountain of goop that should
> > > erupt from the internals of the test system.
(by which I think I meant that we should allow the internal stuff out
if we want it - it's handy for T:U newbies, as I remember)
Of course the benefit to newbie goes away if we have decent docs, but
decent debug messages are probably easier. 8-)
> Exactly. I think we're muddling two different sets of debugging into
> one here.
No, muddling would be accidental. I think the debugging system should
fit in with the program being debugged. It strikes me that debug
output probably suffers because setting up & using a decent framework
is tedious, so if you can ride the T:U one then that's a bonus.
Or rather, we should probably be finding/writing/waiting for a perl
debug message class and using that for T:U.
Matthew #8-)
_______________________________________________
Perlunit-devel mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/perlunit-devel
