Re: More business with $Test::Builder::Level in the TAP tests

From: Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>
To: Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>
Cc: Postgres hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: More business with $Test::Builder::Level in the TAP tests
Date: 2021-10-10 11:18:12
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Lists: pgsql-hackers

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?

In response to


Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Peter Eisentraut 2021-10-10 12:51:38 Re: Time to upgrade buildfarm coverage for some EOL'd OSes?
Previous Message Etsuro Fujita 2021-10-10 08:12:48 Re: Transactions involving multiple postgres foreign servers, take 2