A short and meaningful example isn't easy to come by, but I'll try...

#!/usr/bin/env perl # Let's pretend this is a big "enterprise" application # with lots of modules and stuff. use strict; use warnings; use POSIX qw(strftime); use Assert::Refute { on_fail => 'carp' }; # Let's pretend this real logger (syslog, log4perl, or something) $SIG{__WARN__} = sub { my $mess = shift; chomp $mess; printf STDERR "%s %s[%d] WARN %s\n", strftime( "%Y-%m-%dT%H:%M:%S", localtime ), $0, $$, $mess; }; # Let's pretend this is a big loop with convoluted logic # iterating over tons of user-supplied data for my $num (1 .. 100) { # Let's pretend we skipped a lot of processing here # and a database request that is hard to replicate in isolation # and more processing # <----- HERE!!! # Now we want to add some runtime checks on top of that # so that we know right away when our assumptions don't hold try_refute { my $report = shift; # a report object # Let's pretend we have less stupid conditions being checked # like the fact that $total == $price * $quantity + $fee # or some object actually can TO_JSON and isn't nullified # But generally here we have a runtime assertion DSL mirroring # the interface of Test::More & co # which is by far the most convenient way # to describe _behavior_ in Perl. $report->diag( "verifying number $num" ); $report->ok( $num % 17, "No number is divisible by 17 (TODO on +ly checked first ten)"); $report->isnt( $num, 42, "No number is 42" ); }; # Now at this point on_fail callback has fired if conditions are n +ot met # and the application continues business as usual # because spice must flow! }; # Let's pretend this is not the end of our Big Enterprise Application __END__

This looks stupid, but we actually had a miscalculated price go unnoticed for a few days because a partner's JSON was changed slightly.

So, when I run this code, I get my "log" like follows:

2018-09-01T21:45:48 example/04-lets-pretend.pl[2438] WARN # verifying +number 17 not ok 1 - No number is divisible by 17 (TODO only checked first ten) ok 2 - No number is 42 # Looks like 1 tests out of 2 have failed 1..2 Contract failed at example/04-lets-pretend.pl line 43. 2018-09-01T21:45:48 example/04-lets-pretend.pl[2438] WARN # verifying +number 34 not ok 1 - No number is divisible by 17 (TODO only checked first ten) ok 2 - No number is 42 # Looks like 1 tests out of 2 have failed 1..2 Contract failed at example/04-lets-pretend.pl line 43. 2018-09-01T21:45:48 example/04-lets-pretend.pl[2438] WARN # verifying +number 42 ok 1 - No number is divisible by 17 (TODO only checked first ten) not ok 2 - No number is 42 # Unexpected: 42 # Looks like 1 tests out of 2 have failed 1..2 Contract failed at example/04-lets-pretend.pl line 43. 2018-09-01T21:45:48 example/04-lets-pretend.pl[2438] WARN # verifying +number 51 not ok 1 - No number is divisible by 17 (TODO only checked first ten) ok 2 - No number is 42 # Looks like 1 tests out of 2 have failed 1..2 Contract failed at example/04-lets-pretend.pl line 43. 2018-09-01T21:45:48 example/04-lets-pretend.pl[2438] WARN # verifying +number 68 not ok 1 - No number is divisible by 17 (TODO only checked first ten) ok 2 - No number is 42 # Looks like 1 tests out of 2 have failed 1..2 Contract failed at example/04-lets-pretend.pl line 43. 2018-09-01T21:45:48 example/04-lets-pretend.pl[2438] WARN # verifying +number 85 not ok 1 - No number is divisible by 17 (TODO only checked first ten) ok 2 - No number is 42 # Looks like 1 tests out of 2 have failed 1..2 Contract failed at example/04-lets-pretend.pl line 43.

This is arguably better than having an application silently processing wrong data, but that doesn't look pretty at all.

So here is why I want a terse format that (1) is a one-liner, (2) isn't too verbose, and (3) contains information like condition number, its name, whether it holds, and some explanation if it doesn't hold.

So I think the title was misleading in the OP. I don't need "another unit test report format", I need "just a report format" that happens to hold the same information, but about different conditions...


In reply to Re^4: A terse, one-line alternative to TAP / JUnit? by Dallaylaen
in thread A terse, one-line alternative to TAP / JUnit? by Dallaylaen

Title:
Use:  <p> text here (a paragraph) </p>
and:  <code> code here </code>
to format your post, it's "PerlMonks-approved HTML":



  • Posts are HTML formatted. Put <p> </p> tags around your paragraphs. Put <code> </code> tags around your code and data!
  • Titles consisting of a single word are discouraged, and in most cases are disallowed outright.
  • Read Where should I post X? if you're not absolutely sure you're posting in the right place.
  • Please read these before you post! —
  • Posts may use any of the Perl Monks Approved HTML tags:
    a, abbr, b, big, blockquote, br, caption, center, col, colgroup, dd, del, details, div, dl, dt, em, font, h1, h2, h3, h4, h5, h6, hr, i, ins, li, ol, p, pre, readmore, small, span, spoiler, strike, strong, sub, summary, sup, table, tbody, td, tfoot, th, thead, tr, tt, u, ul, wbr
  • You may need to use entities for some characters, as follows. (Exception: Within code tags, you can put the characters literally.)
            For:     Use:
    & &amp;
    < &lt;
    > &gt;
    [ &#91;
    ] &#93;
  • Link using PerlMonks shortcuts! What shortcuts can I use for linking?
  • See Writeup Formatting Tips and other pages linked from there for more info.