Perl's not the only TAP source

[Steve Purkis]

On 20 May 2009, at 06:29, David E. Wheeler wrote:
[snip - lots of useful stuff]

>> I think we're closing in on a solution, if you've more ideas lemme
>> know.  Will look at putting something together later in the week.
>
> Sounds good.

There's a workable solution here:

http://svn.hexten.net/tapx/branches/sourcedetector

Can people (who aren't me :) try it out and see if it DTRT?  I'd like  
to test the docs too so I'm not gonna say too much, but to direct it:

1. try out prove with *.tap  (create it first ;-)
2. write a plugin for prove that treats *.1 the same way as *.tap
3. try and get a new source of TAP working in a M::B script

And:
4. think of ways we can make any of this easier for people.


> I'm fine with a mapping of suffixes myself, but as I said,
> there has been some resistance. ...
>
>   http://testanything.org/pipermail/tap-l/2008-June/000238.html
>
> But I could see supporting a standard mapping, such as:
>
> .pl - Perl
> .p6 - Perl 6
> .pasm - Parrot
...

$worm_can->open;

I think that's a sensible idea, especially if they're configurable.  I  
actually came to a similar conclusion re: looking @ shebangs.. though  
I've not yet made them available to Source writers it wouldn't be hard  
to.  Would help disambiguate .sql, for example.  And files with no  
extension (that aren't binary).

Unfortunately TAP::Parser *always* assumes files are perl scripts  
unless you use exec.  Winced when I preserved that for backwards  
compat...

If I've done it right, hopefully we've got a good foundation on which  
to take this a lot further.  The sources I've got so far are pretty  
basic...  One way or another we'll have to decide what sources to ship  
by default.

PS: Hope PGCon was good!  if they'd waited a month I mighta made  
it... :)

Cheers,
+--
   Steve Purkis

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.hexten.net/pipermail/tapx-dev/attachments/20090530/69ac32c4/attachment.htm