but complaining that a certain unnamed hypothetical test suite seems big to you is just as silly as complaining that you used string eval in a certain unnamed hypothetical production program.
My point was that test suites constitute an important part of a production development, even though they may not run on production machines. They consitute a significant part of the development effort. But the prevelant idiom, the use of Test::*, applies different standards to the two sides of projects.
warn 'Line 1 of config file invalid' if $line[ 0 ] ne '[Section 1]'; warn 'Line 2 of config file invalid' if $line[ 1 ] =~ m[^filename:(\S+ +)] and -e $1; warn ....
For 400 lines, you'd probably question the methodology used.
That doesn't mean I want to throw a novice head-first into the whole debate...
How many novices have responded in this thread? Where else should such debate take place? Or perhaps you feel that no debate on this subject is called for?
In reply to Re^4: Testing methodology, best practices and a pig in a hut.
by BrowserUk
in thread Testing methodology, best practices and a pig in a hut.
by BrowserUk
For: | Use: | ||
& | & | ||
< | < | ||
> | > | ||
[ | [ | ||
] | ] |