This patch lets Test::More compare circular data structures.
Get the latest version (0.47) of Test::More, apply fixes.patch to fix some
issues, then apply circular.patch. Test with circular.t,
F
--
Do you need someone with lots of Unix sysadmin and/or lots of OO software
development
On Thu, Feb 27, 2003 at 09:21:09PM +, Fergal Daly wrote:
I am already not yet convinced. In particular, it makes this sort of test
more difficult than it needs be:
is_deeply($obj, { foo = 42, bar = 23 });
Absolutely, but there is currently no way to do this
is_deeply($obj
On Thu, Feb 27, 2003 at 10:03:50PM +, Fergal Daly wrote:
- let _deep_check take it's cue from the second argument. If the second
argument is blessed then be strict about the classes, if it's unblessed
then ignore the classes. This should happen at all levels in the
structures.
I'd go for feature, not bug. For me is_deeply has always been for
testing structure. We have isa_ok for checking class identity.
Having one that tested for both might be useful, but I would not change
the behaviour of is_deeply.
Adrian
On Thursday, February 27, 2003, at 05:32 pm, Fergal Daly
True. I usually expose deep objects by methods rather than hash
access, so it's not really a problem for the majority of my code.
Adrian
On Friday, February 28, 2003, at 03:54 pm, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Fri, Feb 28, 2003 at 11:51:07AM +, Adrian Howard wrote:
Option three.
There's a line missing from Test::More::_deep_check(). It results in funny
diagnostics after comparing scalar refs, so
perl -MTest::More=no_plan -e 'is_deeply([(\a) x 5, b], [(\a) x 5, c])'
gives
# Structures begin differing at:
# $got-[0][1][2][3][4][5] = 'b'
# $expected-[0
a bug.
I am already not yet convinced. In particular, it makes this sort of test
more difficult than it needs be:
is_deeply($obj, { foo = 42, bar = 23 });
Absolutely, but there is currently no way to do this
is_deeply($obj, bless({ foo = 42, bar = 23 }, MyClass));
and get a fail if $obj
On Wed, Nov 13, 2002 at 11:32:21AM +1100, Ken Williams wrote:
So why does CPAN.pm depend on Test::More anyway? It only uses
it during its 'make test' phase, not during runtime operations.
And when you can't install modules very easily because you don't
have CPAN.pm working properly, it's
tests have failed, and I can't see a clean way to do this.
In an END block, grab the T::B object and check the summary().
#!/usr/bin/perl -w
use Test::More tests = 1;
pass('foo');
END {
my $failed = grep!$_, Test::More-builder-summary;
diag $failed ? Failed\n
block, grab the T::B object and check the summary().
#!/usr/bin/perl -w
use Test::More tests = 1;
pass('foo');
END {
my $failed = grep!$_, Test::More-builder-summary;
diag $failed ? Failed\n : Passed\n;
}
The only trouble there is if the test as a whole fails during
On Sat 28 Sep 2002 03:25, Michael G Schwern [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Tue, Sep 24, 2002 at 05:57:41PM +0200, H.Merijn Brand wrote:
1. use_ok should have an entry in the manual for minimal version
use_ok (Test::More, 0.47);
This currently doesn't work quite right. Observe
On Tue, Sep 24, 2002 at 05:57:41PM +0200, H.Merijn Brand wrote:
1. use_ok should have an entry in the manual for minimal version
use_ok (Test::More, 0.47);
This currently doesn't work quite right. Observe...
$ perl -MTest::More -wle 'plan tests = 1; use_ok(Text::Soundex, 0.20)'
1..1
1. use_ok should have an entry in the manual for minimal version
use_ok (Test::More, 0.47);
2. I'm testing conversions to and from Unicode
--8---
use Test::More tests = 86;
use strict;
BEGIN {
use_ok (PROCURA::Diac, 4.12);
SKIP: {
$^V ge v5.8.0 or skip Need 5.8.0
Op een mooie herfstdag (Tuesday 24 September 2002 17:57), schreef H.Merijn
Brand:
2. I'm testing conversions to and from Unicode
--8---
use Test::More tests = 86;
use strict;
BEGIN {
use_ok (PROCURA::Diac, 4.12);
SKIP: {
$^V ge v5.8.0 or skip Need 5.8.0 for Unicode, 1
On Sat, Aug 31, 2002 at 02:05:53PM +0200, Elizabeth Mattijsen wrote:
$ perl -Mblib -wle 'use AutoExample; print Yes if
AutoExample-can(foo)'
Using /home/schwern/tmp/AutoExample/blib
Yes
Hmmm... I'm doing BEGIN { use_ok( 'Thread::Pool' ) }... Maybe there is a
difference there...
Hmmm.
At 02:38 PM 8/30/02 -0700, Michael G Schwern wrote:
On Fri, Aug 30, 2002 at 04:01:11PM +0200, Elizabeth Mattijsen wrote:
Is there an easy way to check methods, whose loading is deferred with
AutoLoader, with the can_ok() check?
Nope. You have to create stubs. The AutoLoader module should do
Is there an easy way to check methods, whose loading is deferred with
AutoLoader, with the can_ok() check? Or would some magic need to be added
to AutoLoader.pm?
Currently, you get an error that the subroutines do not exist.
Liz
UNIVERSAL::isa because we want to honor isa() overrides
diff -ur Test-Simple-0.45.old/t/More.t Test-Simple-0.45/t/More.t
--- Test-Simple-0.45.old/t/More.t Sat Apr 20 17:34:40 2002
+++ Test-Simple-0.45/t/More.t Sun Jun 30 17:02:46 2002
-7,7 +7,7
}
}
-use Test::More tests = 41;
+use Test
On Sat, Apr 20, 2002 at 11:51:30AM -0700, chromatic wrote:
Attached is a patch to make Test::More do the right thing (as I see it) in this
case. Previously, it called can() on the class name, which obviously doesn't
work here.
You're right.
I suspect something similar should be done
is called)
Sensible. Done. If anyone asks, it's your fault.
Secondly, I was wondering about eq_set in Test::More.
ok(eq_set([1,1,1],[1]));
fails, where really it should work as sets don't care about reoccurring
elements. Should this be 'eq_bag' instead?
eq_set() is really just because
On Mon, Dec 10, 2001 at 11:19:21PM +, Adrian Howard wrote:
I'm planning on using diag().
ok( $foo == $bar ) || diag 'blah blah';
it has nice mnemonics with:
open(FOO, bar) || die 'blah blah';
ok or diag open or die
Thoughts?
Little to short for my tastes my
web gadget:
use strict;
use Test::More qw(no_plan);
use LWP::Simple;
my $WEB_SYSTEM = 'foo.bar.com';
my $USERNAME = 'foo';
my $PASSWORD = 'bar';
use LWP::UserAgent;
# We make our own specialization of LWP::UserAgent that asks for
# user
OK, I've been putting off figuring this out for ages, but here it is:
#!/usr/bin/perl -w
use strict;
use Inline 'WebChat';
use Test::More 'no_plan';
ok(google(), Can get google);
__END__
__WebChat__
sub google {
GET http
Both Test::More and WWW::Chat export a routine called fail(). This
makes it rather hard to write tests for web stuff using both these
modules.
Since WWW::Chat's fail() is only used internally, could I possibly
request that it be changed to not export, and/or rename it _fail, or
whatever
On Mon, Sep 24, 2001 at 08:40:15PM -0400, Michael G Schwern wrote:
On Mon, Sep 24, 2001 at 06:23:58PM -0500, Dave Rolsky wrote:
The patch below allows you to supply your own test name for the isa_ok
function (I find the default insufficiently descriptive). I'd like to do
the same for
On Fri, Sep 28, 2001 at 05:22:16PM +0100, Andrew Wilson wrote:
I've just written a small logging module and I want ot do this
isa_ok($lj, BlackStar::LumberJack, I'm a LumberJack and I'm ok);
This feature is essential ;-)
Reimplementing the chop() function?
--
Michael G. Schwern
In article [EMAIL PROTECTED], Dave Rolsky
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Tue, 25 Sep 2001, Michael G Schwern wrote:
A, ok. How about this:
my $yarrow = Bar-new;
isa_ok($yarrow, Bar, 'yarrow');
isa_ok($foo, 'Alzabo::Foo', 'Return value from $bar-foreign_keys should be
On Mon, 24 Sep 2001, Michael G Schwern wrote:
On Mon, Sep 24, 2001 at 06:23:58PM -0500, Dave Rolsky wrote:
The patch below allows you to supply your own test name for the isa_ok
function (I find the default insufficiently descriptive). I'd like to do
the same for can_ok but I don't think
On Mon, 24 Sep 2001, Michael G Schwern wrote:
On Mon, Sep 24, 2001 at 06:42:55PM -0500, Dave Rolsky wrote:
+sub eval_ok ($) {
+my ($code, $name) = @_;
+
+eval { $code-() };
+if ($@) {
+ ok( 0, $name - $@ );
+} else {
+ ok( 1, $name );
+}
+}
The
In perl.qa, you wrote:
eval { ...code... };
is( $@, '' );
Yeah, except that doesn't print out $@ in case of failure. If I'm
checking that no exception occurs I want to know what the exception is
when it happens.
But it does! It says something like:
not ok 23
# Failed test 1
+++ More.t Mon Sep 24 18:24:15 2001
@@ -1,4 +1,4 @@
-use Test::More tests = 22;
+use Test::More tests = 23;
use_ok('Text::Soundex');
require_ok('Test::More');
@@ -20,6 +20,7 @@
can_ok pass fail eq_array eq_hash
eq_set));
isa_ok(bless([], Foo), Foo);
+isa_ok
On Mon, Sep 03, 2001 at 05:30:21PM +0100, Nicholas Clark wrote:
t/op/numconvert.t Yes (I don't understand the warning at the top)
Which warning would that be?
Would you believe # Repent for the end is near?
I have no idea what I was talking about.
I think it's more likely to be
When writing tests using Test::More, we should put some phrase
like this in Makefile.PL:
WriteMakefile(
'NAME'= 'Foobar',
'VERSION_FROM' = 'Foobar.pm', # finds $VERSION
'PREREQ_PM' = {
'Test::More' = 0.08,
},
);
This will lead to the following error
33 matches
Mail list logo
