Andy Lester wrote:
> On Feb 19, 2009, at 2:24 PM, Michael G Schwern wrote:
>
>> Andy Lester wrote:
>>> Second point: Should tests 3 and 6 pass? Being unnumbered?
>>
>> Yes, that's by design (or at least happy historical accident).
>
> But "ok 0" should certainly fail, right?
Yeah, that's just a
On Feb 19, 2009, at 2:24 PM, Michael G Schwern wrote:
Andy Lester wrote:
Second point: Should tests 3 and 6 pass? Being unnumbered?
Yes, that's by design (or at least happy historical accident).
But "ok 0" should certainly fail, right?
xoa
--
Andy Lester => a...@petdance.com => www.pet
Andy Lester wrote:
> Second point: Should tests 3 and 6 pass? Being unnumbered?
Yes, that's by design (or at least happy historical accident).
It allows you to run a bunch of tests where you can't guarantee the order or
coordinate the counter. For example, testing anything that forks (threads c
On Thu, 2009-02-19 at 12:44 -0600, Andy Lester wrote:
> The prove -v is lying to me about what the TAP was. That violates
> what was my intent in adding -v originally. I don't want to have to
> run the program manually to get the raw TAP.
Already fixed in SVN.
> [snip]The test number is 0,
First point: I think it's Very Bad that prove is fudging my TAP. I
know that Schwern brought this up yesterday, but I have to add my
voice to the chorus.
uniqua:~/rakudo : perl foo.pl
1..11
ok 1
ok 2
ok
ok 4
ok 5
ok
ok 7
ok 8
ok 9
ok 10
ok 11
uniqua:~/rakudo : prove -v foo.pl
[12:39:24] foo
