Possible bug in TAP::Harness::_initialize()

[Andy Armstrong]

On 4 Sep 2007, at 14:10, Leif Eriksen wrote:
> compalins about calling can() on an undef, should we change it to
>
>     or eval { defined $ref and $ref->can('print') } );
>
> or
>
>     or eval { defined $ref and blessed $ref and $ref->can 
> ('print') } );
>
> or some other variation to handle undef
>
> ?

To be honest I think our old undef handling is reasonably rational.  
I've added a note to the documentation making it explicit. Note that  
no assignment takes place - so undefs are skipped entirely currently.

-- 
Andy Armstrong, hexten.net