Re: Testing Perl files rather than modules

Perl doesn't have "include", but it has "use" and "require"

#!/usr/bin/perl
#script.pl
use strict;
use warnings;

sub hello {
    return "Hello, World!\n"
}
1;

#!/usr/bin/perl
#test.t
use strict;
use warnings;
use Test::More tests => 2;

require_ok("script.pl"); #tests 'require "script.pl"
is(hello(), "Hello, World!\n", 'hello() should return "Hello, World!"'
[download]

Stop saying 'script'. Stop saying 'line-noise'.
We have nothing to lose but our metaphors.

Comment on Re: Testing Perl files rather than modules Download Code

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^2: Testing Perl files rather than modules by Erez (Priest) on Sep 17, 2008 at 07:55 UTC
Also, if you are serious about testing an perl (and about testing in perl), then Perl Testing: A Developer's Notebook(ISBN 9780596100926) is, IMO, a must. Stop saying 'script'. Stop saying 'line-noise'. We have nothing to lose but our metaphors.	[reply]
Re^3: Testing Perl files rather than modules by jvector (Friar) on Sep 17, 2008 at 23:30 UTC
I too have had a recent epiphany "must get serious about testing". So I bought this book too.</p. And I was left with "... but how do I get "there" from "here"??. Because it does tend to start with `use YourMod::YourStuff;` ... which is not very handy if you are not in a modularized position to begin with. I got a great tip from gabszab which suited my current situation (big monolithic CGI script), which was 'invoke the whole thing from your test and use `cmp_ok`', but that's another subject (although it might help in our situation?). This signature will be ready by Christmas	[reply] [d/l] [select]