You may be confusing lack of an integrated Test::More with a lack of testing. While automated testing in a CPAN module is awesome, the omission does not mean the author did not test it. In fact, to assume only automated testing is sufficient is an equivalent evil.

If you spent so much time testing it, and your tests are well written, then why would you not include them in the distro?

I agree that Test::More and make test are the not the only ways to test, but the author seems to have taken the time to include a very basic test.pl script, which from all indications is auto generated in some way, but not taken the time to do anything further. Including tests with a module is just good practice, it lets those of us who are control freaks (you and I) know that you have tested your code. Not including them makes paranoid control freaks (me) very very uncomfortable. And its not just about my mental well being, I have paying clients, who expect me to create reliable and well tested software. To use a module whose tests I cannot see, and have no way to verify is not fair to my clients and frankly unethical IMO.

And yes, you are correct, that testing is no guarantee. However, it is an excellent tool, and one whose benefits should not be dismissed. I would rather have/use the most effective tool available, even if it is only 50% effective, than nothing at all. Basically, 50% is better than 0%.

You are indeed. I am referring to the common falacy of subclassing Car as a Node just because you need a Tree of Cars. I'm not sure having Car as a data element in a Tree is exactly right either, though it is more passable

I thought so, I agree with your point, however I disagree that mixins are the way to solve that. Surely a Car is not a Node, but I don't see a Car as needing to be mix-ed-in with a Node either (meaning the Car now has the properties of a Node as well as that of a Car). I see a Tree of Cars needing Nodes which contain Cars (has-a/delegation however you want to look at it).

Regarging your opinions on Design Patterns, I agree on some points, however, I think this topic deserves its own meditation. Which I would happy to participate to contribute too.

-stvn

In reply to Re^4: How do "you" make a tree in perl by stvn
in thread How do "you" make a tree in perl by stvn

Title:
Use:  <p> text here (a paragraph) </p>
and:  <code> code here </code>
to format your post, it's "PerlMonks-approved HTML":


  • Posts are HTML formatted. Put <p> </p> tags around your paragraphs. Put <code> </code> tags around your code and data!
  • Titles consisting of a single word are discouraged, and in most cases are disallowed outright.
  • Read Where should I post X? if you're not absolutely sure you're posting in the right place.
  • Please read these before you post! —
  • Posts may use any of the Perl Monks Approved HTML tags:
    a, abbr, b, big, blockquote, br, caption, center, col, colgroup, dd, del, details, div, dl, dt, em, font, h1, h2, h3, h4, h5, h6, hr, i, ins, li, ol, p, pre, readmore, small, span, spoiler, strike, strong, sub, summary, sup, table, tbody, td, tfoot, th, thead, tr, tt, u, ul, wbr
  • You may need to use entities for some characters, as follows. (Exception: Within code tags, you can put the characters literally.)
            For:     Use:
    & &amp;
    < &lt;
    > &gt;
    [ &#91;
    ] &#93;
  • Link using PerlMonks shortcuts! What shortcuts can I use for linking?
  • See Writeup Formatting Tips and other pages linked from there for more info.