in reply to RFC: Another test module - Test::NoPlan
If it were my module, I would not export anything by default. Default exports are rather evil. When somebody comes along and reads the code:
all_plans_okay();
how do they find where this subroutine is defined? Well, that becomes obvious when the code above it is:
use Test::NoPlan qw( all_plans_okay );
I also find the module name implies nearly the opposite of what it does. I would rename it Test::AllPlans or similar.
I'd also never use the module since I have no problems just settings the 'plan' to some arbitrary number when I first start writing it and then fixing it as a final step. I never do a temporary "no plan". (It took me a while to realize what the motivation for the module was.)
But thanks for contributing this. I hope you find the feedback useful despite its shortcomings. :)
- tye
|
|---|
| Replies are listed 'Best First'. | |
|---|---|
|
Re^2: RFC: Another test module - Test::NoPlan (NoNoPlan)
by duncs (Beadle) on May 21, 2009 at 08:22 UTC |