Re: The Craft of Software Testing...
Adam Turoff wrote:
It's out of print and nearly impossible to find. I haven't read it yet,
so I can't say whether it is as seminal as McBreen says it is.
Interesting - bn.com claims to have it available. BTW, for years now
only a softcover "facsimile editi
On Wed, Aug 20, 2003 at 10:34:33PM +1000, Andrew Savige wrote:
> Not to mention Semi::Semicolons.
I blame Ziggy for that one.
> You'll have to take my word for it when I claim that I finally realised
> why you'd chosen "Straps" ... right after I pressed the send button.
> Maybe after that "is my
On Wednesday 20 August 2003 08:23, Michael G Schwern wrote:
> You don't want subtests to have to know any state, such as how far to
> indent. Why? Consider:
Something has to keep state, I was assuming it would be the block. Anyway, the
indentation thing is bad because it won't work for threaded
Mr. Keroes has come up with a lovely little device that neatly handles the
problem of configuring module tests.
Module::TestConfig is for this sort of thing:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] Tornado-ConnectionHandler-0.02_06]$ perl Makefile.PL
Where would you like to install the authScript.pl binary? [/usr/loca
On Wednesday 20 August 2003 11:52, Michael G Schwern wrote:
> I've yet to see a real use-case for plans of plans.
Currently it's impossible to use testing functions and plans without major
headaches. If I do this
sub is_valid_person
{
my $person = shift;
like($person->{Name}, "(
On Wed, Aug 20, 2003 at 02:06:04PM +0100, Fergal Daly wrote:
> > Work under the assumption that each subplan is not aware of the state
> > of the overall test. This will produce the most useful protocol.
>
> In the scheme mentioned, the only thing the sub-plan is aware of is it's
> name/number,
On Wed, Aug 20, 2003 at 02:00:28PM +0100, Adrian Howard wrote:
> On Wednesday, August 20, 2003, at 11:52 am, Michael G Schwern wrote:
> [snip]
> >I've yet to see a real use-case for plans of plans.
> [snip]
>
> Anywhere when you want to have plans at a higher level of granularity
> than a test s
On Wed, Aug 20, 2003 at 03:52:42AM -0700, Michael G Schwern wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 20, 2003 at 10:34:08AM +0100, Fergal Daly wrote:
> > On Wednesday 20 August 2003 08:23, Michael G Schwern wrote:
> > > You don't want subtests to have to know any state, such as how far to
> > > indent. Why? Consider:
Dr. Paul T. Jorgensen (my thesis advisor), wrote a book on testing:
Software Testing: A Craftman's Approach
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0849308097/qid=1061400488/sr=1
-1/ref=sr_1_1/002-0515097-5868803?v=glance&s=books
He just released the 2nd edition this year - so it's popular
On Wednesday, August 20, 2003, at 11:52 am, Michael G Schwern wrote:
[snip]
I've yet to see a real use-case for plans of plans.
[snip]
Anywhere when you want to have plans at a higher level of granularity
than a test script.
For example in Test::Class I can say:
sub pig_flying : Test(2) {
A moron once wrote:
> I have a similar problem; I'd like some of my test programs
> to generate other test programs on the fly, then run them.
>
> This seems to work:
>
> use strict;
> use Test::Harness;
> my $outf = 'out.tmp';
> print "1..1\n";
> local *SAVOUT; open(SAVOUT, ">&STDOUT"); # save or
Michael G Schwern wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 20, 2003 at 07:18:54PM +1000, Andrew Savige wrote:
> > I admit to asking my original question as a joke since, as of Perl
> 5.6.1,
> > Test::Harness was pure functional (Test::Harness::Straps no there).
> > However, I am not joking now when I say I have no ide
On Wed, Aug 20, 2003 at 07:18:54PM +1000, Andrew Savige wrote:
> I admit to asking my original question as a joke since, as of Perl 5.6.1,
> Test::Harness was pure functional (Test::Harness::Straps no there).
> However, I am not joking now when I say I have no idea what "Straps"
> means.
harness
On Wed, Aug 20, 2003 at 10:34:08AM +0100, Fergal Daly wrote:
> On Wednesday 20 August 2003 08:23, Michael G Schwern wrote:
> > You don't want subtests to have to know any state, such as how far to
> > indent. Why? Consider:
>
> Something has to keep state
The state of the overall test? No, that
Michael G Schwern wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 24, 2003 at 10:55:57AM +1000, Andrew Savige wrote:
>> I'd be interested to see an example of sub-classing Test::Harness.
>
> See examples/mini_harness.plx in Test::Harness.
>
> The straps interface is not yet entirely usable.
Thanks. Looks interesting.
I ad
On Wed, Jun 25, 2003 at 02:25:11PM +0100, Fergal Daly wrote:
> I just wanted to bring up nested blocks and sub-plans again. I've been hacking
> around in Test::Builder and I've implemented something that works and does
> something that I think is useful. It allows you to write tests that have
>
On Thu, Jul 24, 2003 at 10:55:57AM +1000, Andrew Savige wrote:
> I'd be interested to see an example of sub-classing Test::Harness.
See examples/mini_harness.plx in Test::Harness.
The straps interface is not yet entirely usable.
--
Michael G Schwern[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.pobox.c
Hi!
On Tue, Aug 19, 2003 at 04:00:44PM +0100, Tony Bowden wrote:
> I'd certainly like to see something like this worked on. We do a lot of
> this stuff automagically as part of our RCS anyway - people can't check
> in code that doesn't pass certain guidelines (all public methods
> documented etc.
18 matches
Mail list logo
