[Pdx-pm] Test::Builder calling convention

David E. Wheeler david at kineticode.com
Fri Mar 13 14:00:57 PDT 2009

On Mar 13, 2009, at 11:51 AM, Michael G Schwern wrote:

> My thought is for ok() to store the real result object in history  
> and return a
> thin wrapper object that does nothing but delegates everything to  
> the result.
> Then when it gets destroyed it can tell the real result object to  
> flush.

+1, sounds smart.

> In the end, I really like the flexibility the object chaining  
> gives.  Its
> going to make it very easy to add new methods.  I don't like the  
> complexity
> and magic of determining when the result should output and would  
> like to see
> and good ideas on that.

Can you cite an example of what you dislike here, so we can sink our  
teeth into something?

> As always, +1 and -1s appreciated.




More information about the Pdx-pm-list mailing list