Michael G Schwern wrote:
On Tue, Dec 21, 2004 at 04:53:18PM +0100, Tels wrote:
On Tuesday 21 December 2004 08:53, Michael G Schwern wrote:
I've gotten absolutely no response about Test::Legacy. Is anybody
using it? Anybody tried migrating old Test.pm based tests with it?
I am converting
On Tue, Dec 21, 2004 at 12:56:27PM -0500, Geoffrey Young wrote:
There's no I want to add a new test to this test file that uses Test.pm and
it would be nice if I could use Test::Foo case?
I could see this being really good for Apache-Test, which is by default
Test.pm driven. the thing is
But for all Test::Builder based modules you can get the same intent with
Test::Builder-reset.
yup, I used that for the port away from Test.pm - works like a charm :)
--Geoff
On Tue, Dec 21, 2004 at 06:09:40PM +0100, Tels wrote:
Granted, that was what I did before Test::Legacy, which seems to have gone
from a wild idea to some working stage while I was not looking :)
Most of it was written in about an hour and a half late one night with
another hour worth of
On Tue 21 Dec 2004 18:32, Michael G Schwern [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Tue, Dec 21, 2004 at 04:53:18PM +0100, Tels wrote:
On Tuesday 21 December 2004 08:53, Michael G Schwern wrote:
I've gotten absolutely no response about Test::Legacy. Is anybody
using it? Anybody tried migrating old
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Moin,
On Tuesday 21 December 2004 19:35, Michael G Schwern wrote:
On Tue, Dec 21, 2004 at 06:09:40PM +0100, Tels wrote:
Granted, that was what I did before Test::Legacy, which seems to have
gone from a wild idea to some working stage while I was not
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Moin,
On Tuesday 21 December 2004 18:32, Michael G Schwern wrote:
On Tue, Dec 21, 2004 at 04:53:18PM +0100, Tels wrote:
On Tuesday 21 December 2004 08:53, Michael G Schwern wrote:
I've gotten absolutely no response about Test::Legacy. Is anybody
using