Eric Wilhelm wrote:
> # from Michael G Schwern
> # on Thursday 29 November 2007 19:00:
>
>> Otherwise, what's important to people?
>
> Could it be made fork-safe?
>
> http://search.cpan.org/src/TJENNESS/File-Temp-0.19/t/fork.t
>
> Possibly that involves blocking, or IPC with delayed output, o
Andy Armstrong wrote:
> On 30 Nov 2007, at 03:00, Michael G Schwern wrote:
>> Otherwise, what's important to people? I know there's a lot of
>> suggestions
>> about increasing the flexibility of planning. Also the oft requested
>> "I'm
>> done running tests" sentinel for a safer "no_plan". Most
As threatened, here's Test::Fork for easier writing of forked tests.
http://pobox.com/~schwern/src/Test-Fork-0.01_01.tar.gz
use Test::More tests => 4;
use Test::Fork;
fork_ok(2, sub{
pass("Child");
pass("Child again");
});
On 30 Nov 2007, at 07:49, chromatic wrote:
I don't believe producer (Test::Builder) and consumer (Test::Harness)
are necessarily entirely alike or symmetrical in this regard. T::B
pushes and T::H pulls - which makes callbacks or some higher level
event driven interface more appropriate for T::H t
Michael G Schwern wrote:
> Otherwise, what's important to people?
Here's something that's important to me. I'd like to make it easier for
people to patch my modules. A bunch of people already have write access to my
repository, and I've taken care to ensure that most all the outstanding items
ar
