Re: echo problems with bleadperl tests

On Sun, 11 Feb 2001, Craig A. Berry wrote: > Yes, and as you surmise, I think it's one of the Schwern patches > where this restriction is lifted. Apparently anything following 'ok' > and the test number is now allowed. This is a serious mistake. Restricting what gets called ok adds rigor an

Re: echo problems with bleadperl tests

At 10:26 PM -0500 2/10/01, lane @ DUPHY4.Physics.Drexel.Edu wrote: >In article , "Craig A. Berry" ><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >> With perl @8752, I'm seeing two test failures. Both result from the >> test's printing ok messages with two integral print stat

Re: echo problems with bleadperl tests

In article , "Craig A. Berry" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > With perl @8752, I'm seeing two test failures. Both result from the > test's printing ok messages with two integral print statements, which > works fine when just run with Perl directly, but breaks w

echo problems with bleadperl tests

With perl @8752, I'm seeing two test failures. Both result from the test's printing ok messages with two integral print statements, which works fine when just run with Perl directly, but breaks when run within the test suite. Because our "echo" substitute uses LIB$PUT_OUTPUT to do its business,