[tap-l] Mad TAP proposal

[Andy Armstrong]

On 1 Nov 2007, at 14:12, Michael Peters wrote:

> Andy Armstrong wrote:
>
>> Yeah - I slept on it. It should be TSP - Test Steering Protocol. If a
>> test emits TAP it's a test, if it emits TSP it's a controller. TAP
>> should stay pure.
>
> Sounds to me like it should just be a custom test harness. If the  
> user needs to
> dynamically figure out which tests to run, then why not create a  
> custom harness
> which will do what they need. This way they can have control over  
> not only which
> files to run, but which routines (if they're using Test::Class),  
> etc, etc.
> Writing your own harness is trivial now. I'd say writing something  
> to emit a new
> protocol is no easier than writing a script that picks the test  
> files/subs to run.


Yeah, but from the user's PoV this is pretty easy:

# t/controller.t
use Test::Steering;

include ('xt/frob') if frob_avail();
include ('xt/slow') if all_the_time_in_the_world();

And it's not too hard to support in the harness.

-- 
Andy Armstrong, Hexten