On 14.Feb.2005 09:01PM -0800, chromatic wrote:
> Here's my list of suggestions for each:
>
> 1) label, description
> 2) directive, instruction
> 3) diagnostic
>
> I want to avoid the word "comment" altogether, making the
> optionalness of #1 and #3 evident in their words, the
> activeness of #2
On Tue, Feb 22, 2005 at 03:40:55PM -0500, Peter Kay wrote:
> Chromatic wrote:
> >1) an optional description of a test, which occurs after the test number
> >but precedes an optional '#' character and anything following until the
> >newline character, having no effect on parsing
>
> Summary?
Summa
Chromatic wrote:
1) an optional description of a test, which occurs after the test number
but precedes an optional '#' character and anything following until the
newline character, having no effect on parsing
Summary?
That's what the one line short description in Bugzilla is called.
--Peter
> Hm, that does seem valuable. Should all test modules report their
> versions by default, though?
well, my thought was that it was more important to list the source of the
comparison operators the user uses (like is() or eq_array()) than it was the
internal stuff that, say, interfaces with Test
Fergal Daly wrote:
I was thinking of knocking together Test::AnnounceVersion.
use Test::AnnounceVersion qw(A::List Of::Modules);
which results in
# using version 1.5 of A::List
# using version 0.1 of Of::Modules
supplying no import args would make it output $VERSION from every package it
can find.
I was thinking of knocking together Test::AnnounceVersion.
use Test::AnnounceVersion qw(A::List Of::Modules);
which results in
# using version 1.5 of A::List
# using version 0.1 of Of::Modules
supplying no import args would make it output $VERSION from every package it
can find.
If you don't w
On Fri, 2005-02-18 at 09:25 -0500, Geoffrey Young wrote:
> yeah, I'll second this, at least so far as adding a version component to
> Test::More goes (which is different than adding a TAP version, which I don't
> have an opinion on:). Test.pm currently prints out
>
> # Using Test.pm version 1.
On Fri, Feb 18, 2005 at 01:41:17PM +, Mark Stosberg wrote:
> > Err, why? Who else is emitting a version string? Or anything? Do we
> > start prefixing everything else with TAP?
>
> I have intentionally put version strings in the output, especially of
> of related modules. For example, DBD::
> This is helpful for processing bug reports, so I don't have to make
> second trip back to the user to ask: "What version of CGI.pm where you
> using?".
yeah, I'll second this, at least so far as adding a version component to
Test::More goes (which is different than adding a TAP version, which
On 2005-02-18, Michael G Schwern <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 18, 2005 at 01:13:05AM +, Mark Stosberg wrote:
>> On 2005-02-15, Clayton, Nik <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> >
>> >ver 1.1
>>
>> If you go this route, I would make it clear whose emitting the version
>> string:
>>
>>
On Fri, Feb 18, 2005 at 01:13:05AM +, Mark Stosberg wrote:
> On 2005-02-15, Clayton, Nik <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> >ver 1.1
>
> If you go this route, I would make it clear whose emitting the version
> string:
>
> TAP version 1.1
Err, why? Who else is emitting a version string
On 2005-02-15, Clayton, Nik <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>ver 1.1
If you go this route, I would make it clear whose emitting the version
string:
TAP version 1.1
###
Mark
--
http://mark.stosberg.com/
On Tue, Feb 15, 2005 at 09:44:03AM -, Clayton, Nik wrote:
>todo 3 - Todo, using new todo syntax
>
> should it ever be decided that putting 'skip' and 'todo' markers after
> a character that has had at least 25 years of being treated as a comment
> marker is not necessarily a good idea...
> #2 and #3 look similar but act differently. Unfixable by about 16
> years. Fine.
On that thought -- how do people feel about describing a mechanism for
extending TAP now, while there's only one large consumer of it, rather
than later, when there are (hopefully) going to be multiple disparate
u
On Mon, Feb 14, 2005 at 09:17:54PM -0800, Ovid wrote:
> --- chromatic <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Can you tell I'm wearing my editor's hat?
>
> Awfully big hat :)
Goes with the pants.
--- chromatic <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Can you tell I'm wearing my editor's hat?
Awfully big hat :)
=
If this message is a response to a question on a mailing list, please send
follow up questions to the list.
Web Programming with Perl -- http://users.easystreet.com/ovid/cgi_course/
On Mon, 2005-02-14 at 23:04 -0600, Andy Lester wrote:
> Darn you and your clear thinking.
Truly clear thinking would have realized that Description, Directive,
Diagnostics is a very nice mnemonic. (It's doubly nice because
"diagnostics" appears in the plural form so much more often than the
sing
On Feb 14, 2005, at 9:01 PM, chromatic wrote:
Here's my list of suggestions for each:
1) label, description
2) directive, instruction
3) diagnostic
I want to avoid the word "comment" altogether, making the optionalness
of #1 and #3 evident in their words, the activeness of #2 evident in
its
word,
I want to avoid the word "comment" altogether, making the optionalness
of #1 and #3 evident in their words, the activeness of #2 evident in
its
word, and any comparison to Perl's comments in syntax or name go away.
Darn you and your clear thinking.
xoa
--
Andy Lester => [EMAIL PROTECTED] => www.pe
On Mon, 2005-02-14 at 14:38 -0600, Andy Lester wrote:
> Anything that starts with # is ignored by the harness. That's very
> different from the test comment.
Yet Test::Harness::TAP calls them comments and comment lines!
Put on my boots for a second. Here's what I'm trying to explain:
On Mon, Feb 14, 2005 at 03:32:35PM -0500, Michael G Schwern ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
wrote:
> > But it makes explaining the TAP format a pain. The "test comment" is
> > everything after the test number or "ok" and before the # comment
> > marker or end of the line.
Anything that starts with # is ign
On Mon, Feb 14, 2005 at 10:04:44AM -0800, Ovid wrote:
> Is this not correct? Where is the TAP protocol documented?
http://search.cpan.org/~petdance/Test-Harness-2.46/lib/Test/Harness/TAP.pod
(Any Test-Harness distribution 2.46 or later, IIRC)
Nicholas Clark
On Mon, Feb 14, 2005 at 09:48:39AM -0800, Ovid wrote:
> It makes good enough sense when you're dealing with the call to the
> test:
>
>ok($blah, "This is a test comment");
>
> But it makes explaining the TAP format a pain. The "test comment" is
> everything after the test number or "ok" and
Quoting chromatic <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> On Mon, 2005-02-14 at 11:49 -0600, Andy Lester wrote:
>
> > It's a comment.
>
> *What* is a comment? Is it the semantically insignificant text that can
> contain skip or TODO or the semantically significant text with a
> preceding # somewhere?
> They're se
--- Andy Lester <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 14, 2005 at 09:48:39AM -0800, Ovid
> ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> > It's actually rather important that I have an answer for this, but
> I
> > really can't go into more detail (sorry).
>
> It's a comment.
There's more than one thing being d
On Mon, 2005-02-14 at 11:49 -0600, Andy Lester wrote:
> It's a comment.
*What* is a comment? Is it the semantically insignificant text that can
contain skip or TODO or the semantically significant text with a
preceding # somewhere?
Is it both? I find that full of explanatory confusion potentia
On Mon, Feb 14, 2005 at 09:48:39AM -0800, Ovid ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> It's actually rather important that I have an answer for this, but I
> really can't go into more detail (sorry).
It's a comment.
--
Andy Lester => [EMAIL PROTECTED] => www.petdance.com => AIM:petdance
What follows are the notes I have from someone else regarding the name
"comment" for what was previously considered the "label."
It's actually rather important that I have an answer for this, but I
really can't go into more detail (sorry).
Cheers,
Ovid
> It's been settled. It's officially a "te
28 matches
Mail list logo
