I'd say that reducing boilerplate code is one of the main advantages of Test::Most, so I think it will be logically if it will enable strict and warnings. The people who don't love surprises and magic can always replace it with:
use strict; use warnings; use Test::More; use Test::Exception; use Test::Differences; use Test::Deep; use Test::Warn;
In reply to Re^4: Should Test::Most import strict and warnings?
by zwon
in thread Should Test::Most import strict and warnings?
by Ovid
| For: | Use: | ||
| & | & | ||
| < | < | ||
| > | > | ||
| [ | [ | ||
| ] | ] |