in reply to Re: why Test::More?
in thread why Test::More?

thanks....opened my eyes. would you normally have a *.t file for every subroutine? How do you chain tests? (e.g. run t01.t .. t50.t)

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^3: why Test::More?
by MidLifeXis (Monsignor) on Sep 10, 2013 at 14:10 UTC

    App::Prove is a typical harness that is used. Also see make test and build test in the build tool chain.

    I have been using (or trying to change my habits to use) Test Driven Development, to minimize the amount of untested code in my codebase. I have been using one .t file per package (well, per .pm file).*

    * - In reality, I use Test::Class with a unittests.t loader, but that is more of an implementation detail. In effect it is one test file per source file. Test::Class uses inheritance, but I think that test files could also be written using roles.

    --MidLifeXis

[reply]
[d/l]
[select]

      App::ForkProve is nice as a more-or-less drop-in replacement for App::Prove.

      use Moops; class Cow :rw { has name => (default => 'Ermintrude') }; say Cow->new->name
[reply]
      thank you
[reply]

In Section Seekers of Perl Wisdom