Re: Changes in Latest Version of CGI::Application (4.02)

I'm the guilty party, and I just got bit by the change, too. Michael Graham mailed me privately to provide additional insight. We'll take care of it ASAP.

It seemed like a minor change... and the whole test suite passed, but there apparently was no test for this changed behavior.

Mark Stosberg

Comment on Re: Changes in Latest Version of CGI::Application (4.02)

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^2: Changes in Latest Version of CGI::Application (4.02) by agentv (Friar) on Aug 05, 2005 at 19:53 UTC
...we ARE the test! :-) ---v ...All the world looks like -well- all the world, when your hammer is Perl. ---v	[reply]
Re^2: Changes in Latest Version of CGI::Application (4.02) by szabgab (Priest) on Aug 05, 2005 at 22:40 UTC
hmm, and I should be posing as the hoplite for this module but have not doing my job for a while. It seem so much time that the module was even removed from the Phalanx list. I should check the coverage of the module again and improve it if there big holes in the test suit.	[reply]
Re^3: Changes in Latest Version of CGI::Application (4.02) by markjugg (Curate) on Aug 22, 2005 at 20:40 UTC
Curiously, Devel::Cover wouldn't have caught this, because all the code was executed already by the test suite. It's only when you override particular methods that the bug is exposed. So it would be quite possible to write a test for it, although difficult to detect that the case wasn't covered by a test. Mark Stosberg	[reply]