| From: | Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Dagfinn Ilmari Mannsåker <ilmari(at)ilmari(dot)org> |
| Cc: | Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>, Daniel Gustafsson <daniel(at)yesql(dot)se>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Readd use of TAP subtests |
| Date: | 2021-12-09 15:51:17 |
| Message-ID: | b7e1cbbf-d4dd-8c33-42be-c1a81b162363@enterprisedb.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 08.12.21 18:31, Tom Lane wrote:
> A question that seems pretty relevant here is: what exactly is the
> point of using the subtest feature, if we aren't especially interested
> in its effect on the overall test count? I can see that it'd have
> value when you wanted to use skip_all to control a subset of a test
> run, but I'm not detecting where is the value-added in the cases in
> Peter's proposed patch.
It's useful if you edit a test file and add (what would appear to be) N
tests and want to update the number.
But I'm also OK with the done_testing() style, if there are no drawbacks
to that.
Does that call into question why we raised the Test::More version to
begin with? Or were there other reasons?
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Justin Pryzby | 2021-12-09 15:53:23 | Re: GUC flags |
| Previous Message | Bharath Rupireddy | 2021-12-09 15:50:54 | Re: add recovery, backup, archive, streaming etc. activity messages to server logs along with ps display |