From: | Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> |
---|---|
To: | Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> |
Cc: | Postgres hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: More business with $Test::Builder::Level in the TAP tests |
Date: | 2021-10-11 14:48:54 |
Message-ID: | 378556bb-680b-aa04-9cd4-b98b0dbc300d@dunslane.net |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 10/10/21 7:18 AM, Michael Paquier wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 08, 2021 at 12:14:57PM -0400, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
>> I think we need to be more explicit about it, especially w.r.t. indirect
>> calls. Every subroutine in the call stack below where you want to error
>> reported as coming from should contain this line.
> Hmm. I got to think about that for a couple of days, and the
> simplest, still the cleanest, phrasing I can come up with is that:
> This should be incremented by any subroutine part of a stack calling
> test routines from Test::More, like ok() or is().
>
> Perhaps you have a better suggestion?
I would say:
This should be incremented by any subroutine which directly or indirectly calls test routines from Test::More, such as ok() or is().
cheers
andrew
--
Andrew Dunstan
EDB: https://www.enterprisedb.com
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2021-10-11 14:57:26 | Re: EXPLAIN(VERBOSE) to CTE with SEARCH BREADTH FIRST fails |
Previous Message | Prabhat Sahu | 2021-10-11 14:44:59 | Corruption with IMMUTABLE functions in index expression. |