Re: Revert use_ok() change to allow lexical effects?
Ovid <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.comp.lang.perl.quality-assurance |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
----- Original Message ----- > From: Aristotle Pagaltzis <[email protected]> > > * Michael G Schwern <[email protected]> [2012-04-11 18:35]: >> Nope, too much magic for too small a use case. > > And faithfully duplicating `use` would be less so? :-) > > I don’t see how it is any more magic than `done_testing`. Because done_testing is applicable to every test module and solves the far more common issue of hating maintain a plan. I would argue that done_testing is much more necessary than an AutoBailout. That being said, I'd use AutoBailout a lot more often if it was available. Then again, as Schwern pointed out, that's why I wrote Test::Most :) > What I don’t like about duplicating `use` is that you need to diddle > internals and ... I think Schwern's not arguing against this. He's just trying to figure out the best way forward. Cheers, Ovid -- Live and work overseas - http://www.overseas-exile.com/ Buy the book - http://www.oreilly.com/catalog/perlhks/ Tech blog - http://blogs.perl.org/users/ovid/ Twitter - http://twitter.com/OvidPerl/