On Thu, Aug 20, 2009 at 1:21 PM, Michael G Schwern schw...@pobox.comwrote:
Jim Cromie wrote:
What's notable in its absence is any *real* use of perl-dist's tests.
I dug into the code, and found that this works.
$ HARNESS_TIMER=1 make test
ext/threads/t/end
I was pondering a perl-core todo-item
=head2 A decent benchmark
Cperlbench seems impervious to any recent changes made to the perl core. It
would be useful to have a reasonable general benchmarking suite that roughly
represented what current perl programs do, and measurably reported whether
Paul Johnson wrote:
On Mon, Jul 11, 2005 at 02:54:19PM -0700, Michael G Schwern wrote:
On Mon, Jul 11, 2005 at 11:22:51PM +0200, Paul Johnson wrote:
my $foo = $bar || default(); # DC ignore X|0
Hey, Devel::Cover! Ignore the case where the right side of this logic is
false.
There is no skip_rest(), but skip_all() can do that job, with a tiny
enhancement
sub skip_all {
-if (@_) {
- print STDOUT 1..0 # Skipped: @_\n;
+if ($test == 1) {
+ if (@_) {
+ print STDOUT 1..0 \# Skipped: @_\n;
+ } else {
+ print STDOUT 1..0\n;
+
Sébastien Aperghis-Tramoni wrote:
Selon Michael G Schwern [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
On Sun, Mar 06, 2005 at 09:54:44PM +0100, S?bastien Aperghis-Tramoni wrote:
Instead of running the code on one server, where it's a problem, why
not running on machines where all prereq modules are already
Cdric Bouvier wrote:
I think I will call it Run::Distributed after all.
theres also module-authors@perl.org that discusses name-space choices
regularly.
Michael G Schwern wrote:
On Mon, Mar 07, 2005 at 07:45:39AM -0700, Jim Cromie wrote:
Theres another issue: coverage can depend upon presense of other modules,
ex Test::Warnings, being installed on testers boxes, those tests would
be skipped otherwise,
and perceived coverage would suffer
Michael G Schwern wrote:
On Mon, Mar 07, 2005 at 11:24:42AM -0700, Jim Cromie wrote:
are MM or MB analyses posted anywhere for general perusal ?
Nope. You're free to run it yourself though. :)
Its likely to be pretty appauling because of all the multi-platform code and
that XS code
suggest that the embedded tests trump the outer ones,
cuz the line-counts thru most of the module-report are 6, matching the
number of embedded $^X tests.
Is there an easy way to do what Im trying ?
tia
Jim Cromie
for various reasons, it would be nice to have a newsgroup,
ex this one (perl.test, but sending failed), or perhaps
[EMAIL PROTECTED], that gets full-reports for smoke-tests when
something breaks.
While I recognize that failure reports on [EMAIL PROTECTED] are
often user misconfigurations, etc,
Jim Cromie wrote:
folks,
attached patch has following adjustments to B::Concise and its tests.
heres 2nd rev of that patch, now against 22802
- crossposted to perl-qa for its test related aspects.
items 1-9 from prev post are all improved or solved
a. goto-bug squashed - reset_sequence() now
Potozniak, Andrew wrote:
Encouraging simple status reports, say monthly, may help ensure
progress.
Or...we could set some deadlines...like have 50% of your
module tested
by YAPC, and/or possibly have some incentives.
Say ..50%.. of modules tested by YAPC or we cancel the
stevan little wrote:
I looked on the site (http://qa.perl.org/phalanx/), but there was
nothing said about how to get involved in this project. Are you
looking for help? And if so, how can I help?
Thanks,
Steve
sure. Pick a module from phalanx 100, based upon your personal uses,
or whichever
Andy Lester wrote:
thats precisely what -v does currently, same convenience argument applies.
I see a difference in that
prove -v
is shorthand for
TEST_VERBOSE=1 make test
I'm not against the idea. Just not sure about the implementation.
Whyncha write the manpage docs for how
Andy, etal,
Id like to propose that I (or someone like me) add a passthru option
which lets someone pass thru options and arguments to the test scripts
being run.
The idea is to support 'torture' testing as it is typically (I think)
done now.
and not coincidentally ...
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Jim Cromie wrote:
Rafael Garcia-Suarez wrote:
2. you gave me an idea for a Grand Plan.
Heres a 'working' version of my earlier proposal,
patched against [EMAIL PROTECTED]
I hope you find it useful for regression testing of the optimizer,
and the opcode generation phases.
1st some changes
Folks,
I hope this is an appropriate forum, I want to get the topic off of p5p,
and return there later with a more polished solution...
Rafael Garcia-Suarez wrote:
jim cromie wrote:
I picked this back up recently, I think it now incorporates all comments
from this thread started 1/6/04, plus
Ruslan U. Zakirov wrote:
Hello, all.
I have several questions about multiply perl versions.
Im not sure this Q is on-topic, but here goes.
(btw, its multiple, as in many, not multiply, as opposite of divide)
1) I have got RH9 and FreeBSD and when I was setting up perl5.8.1
script ask me
Fergal Daly wrote:
On Wed, Dec 17, 2003 at 09:28:48AM -0700, Jim Cromie wrote:
Hi Fergal,
Id like to see a slightly different interface:
is_faster( sub{}, sub{}, 1st is faster);
This would be nice but what value should I use for iterations? I suppose -1
Benchmark defaults to -3. Its
hi folks,
I just got a CPANTS report..
I am puzzled how
5 tests could fail 10 times
DIED. FAILED tests 1-5
Failed 5/5 tests, 0.00% okay
Failed Test Stat Wstat Total Fail Failed List of Failed
---
t\speed.t
putting a name to it is painting a bullseye on it ;-)
I recently wrote a test to do a benchmark / performance test,
and found it somewhat difficult to get the output out to screen,
the STDOUT, STDERR takeover done by Test::More was
catching, and counting it as errors. (i think, but its not
hi all,
im patching a module that uses Test::More, and I want to include a test
to prove that a carp is being called when function args are wrong.
I half-expected to find a stderr_like() that would do the trick.
I ended up with this;
{
local $SIG{__WARN__} = sub {
return if $_[0] =~
5.8.1 recently started failing 2 tests in op/cproto.t, on pop(), shift();
this only happens on one box, ie RH-7.2, not RH-9, and I havent tried
a make distclean, so I havent reported it to p5p.
Instead I decided that some false laziness was in order, and I should go
digging.
But, I thought it
23 matches
Mail list logo
