Re: Benefits of Test::Exception

On Sun, Dec 31, 2006 at 02:13:47AM +0000, Fergal Daly wrote:
> I think the code about should die comlaining about dies_ok() is
> unknown. So you need to do even more.

No it doesn't... This is one of those things about perl - code that
looks like a function call is never checked to see if the function
exists until runtime:

  #!/usr/bin/perl
  use warnings;
  use strict;

  print "Here I have started running now\n";

  foobarsplot();

  ^-- won't complain until runtime.

That's what gave me the motivation to write B::LintSubs, by the way:

  http://search.cpan.org/~pevans/B-LintSubs-0.02/

> Don't you get the same problem with any non-standard test module?

Yes; but Test::More seems to be installed as part of whatever the
testing core is on various things that automatically test my CPAN
modules. I note whenever I upload something, lots of machines around the
world manage to automatically test it. I use Test::More everywhere and
they can cope.

> If you alread yhave some CPAN dependencies then adding another for
> testing is perfecctly reasonable. It would be nice if the various CPAN
> tools could understand the difference between a runtime dependecy and
> a test-time one though,

EU::MM can't, but I believe Module::Build can. That said, the consensus
on #perl/Freenode is that the latter isn't really ready yet, so just use
the former. Ho hum..

-- 
Paul "LeoNerd" Evans

leonerd@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
ICQ# 4135350       |  Registered Linux# 179460
http://www.leonerd.org.uk/

signature.asc
Description: Digital signature