Re: 'either or' value unit test case in Test::Simple or Test::More

I would write that as separate pass calls, which allows you to see which one matched.

if ($var eq 'a') {
    pass( 'var is an a' );
}
elsif ($var eq 'b') {
    pass( 'var is a b' );
}
else {
    fail( "var was $var" );
}
[download]

Be careful here and don't go too tricky in the code flow, otherwise you may end up with a pass() in one branch, and nothing in the other, which will lead to strange off-by-one errors in the test plan. KISS.

• another intruder with the mooring in the heart of the Perl

Comment on Re: 'either or' value unit test case in Test::Simple or Test::More Download Code

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^2: 'either or' value unit test case in Test::Simple or Test::More by ferreira (Chaplain) on Jan 05, 2007 at 16:43 UTC
What about an overkill abstract solution? `# is_one_of($val, \@list); sub is_one_of { my $val = shift; my $list = shift; my $test_name = "$val is not one of @$list"; for (@$list) { pass($test_name), return if $val eq $_; } diag "never saw [$val] in [@$list]"; fail($test_name); }` [download] And then palette may say: `is_one_of($var, [ qw(a b) ]);` [download] Update: fixed after grinder's comment — `return` and `diag` added.	[reply] [d/l] [select]
Re^3: 'either or' value unit test case in Test::Simple or Test::More by grinder (Bishop) on Jan 05, 2007 at 16:49 UTC
If $list winds up with duplicate values that match $val, your plan is in big trouble. I would change that to `for (@$list) { if ($val eq $_) { pass($test_name); return; } } diag "never saw [$val] in [@$list]"; fail($test_name);` [download] • another intruder with the mooring in the heart of the Perl	[reply] [d/l]