On Jul 31, 2004, at 1:14 AM, Stas Bekman wrote:
so, have_foo is intuitive to be used anywhere in the code, and plan now will look like:
plan tests => 5, need_lwp, need_cgi, need_php;
I like this, but isn't it putting the onus of change on module owners and introducing the likelihood of unexpected test failures when module owners don't realize that they need to change their C<use> lines from have_* to need_*?
Perhaps we leave have_* with its current semantics, but then add "got_*" for the new semantics to be used anywhere in the code:
# Always allow redirection. my $redir = got_lwp ? [qw(GET HEAD POST)] : 1; Apache::TestRequest::user_agent(reset => 1, requests_redirectable => $redir);
to me, got and have are exactly the same thing. How are you going to remember which one to use when?
Authors of the existing tests don't have to change anything, have_foo will work just the same, but won't add the skip reason anymore. This won't make affect the existing tests in any way, rather than not printing the reason for a tests being skipped.
But, yes, the transition could be made 100% perfect, by keeping have_ as it is, and adding a new interface which doesn't add the skip reason. But we need to find an unambiguous name for it. skip_foo will be good, but we have a general function have(), which can't be replaced with skip(). So may be want_foo() is a better choice. Or may be you have a better name...
-- __________________________________________________________________ Stas Bekman JAm_pH ------> Just Another mod_perl Hacker http://stason.org/ mod_perl Guide ---> http://perl.apache.org mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://use.perl.org http://apacheweek.com http://modperlbook.org http://apache.org http://ticketmaster.com
