Re: HOWTO: Writing Perl6 Tests (was: Project Start: Section 1)

"Sean O'Rourke" <[email protected]> wrote in message > One thing the
"golden-output" has going for it is that it gets into and
> out of perl6 as quickly as possible.  In other words, it relies on
> perl6/parrot to do just about the minimum required of it, then passes
> verification off to outside tools (e.g. perl5).  I realize they can be
> fragile, but at least for the moment, we can't rely on a complete
> perl6 Test::Foo infrastructure, and I think that in general, we
> _shouldn't_ require such a thing for the very basic tests.  Because if we
> do, and something basic is broken, all the tests will break because of it,
> making the bug-hunter's job much more difficult.

I see where you are coming from ... but is the IO infrastructure really the
most primitive thing to rely on? It may be at the moment; but I expect
that it will become more complex. C<print> may be a built-in right now;
but it should probably move to a module later.

If we can't rely on C<assert(0)> to kill a test (and C<assert(1) not to>;
then things are pretty badly broken (assuming that C<assert> exists).

If we are going to pick a very small subset on which almost all tests
will depend ... isn't it better to pick the test-infrastructure itself to be
that dependency; rather that some arbitrary module (like IO).


Dave.