Test::More man page on Raspbian

Man page or keyword search:  
man Server   8174 pages
apropos Keyword Search (all sections)
Output format
Raspbian logo
[printable version]

Test::More(3pm)	      User Contributed Perl Documentation      Test::More(3pm)

NAME
       Test::More - yet another framework for writing test scripts

SYNOPSIS
	 use Test::More tests => 23;
	 # or
	 use Test::More skip_all => $reason;
	 # or
	 use Test::More;   # see done_testing()

	 BEGIN { use_ok( 'Some::Module' ); }
	 require_ok( 'Some::Module' );

	 # Various ways to say "ok"
	 ok($got eq $expected, $test_name);

	 is  ($got, $expected, $test_name);
	 isnt($got, $expected, $test_name);

	 # Rather than print STDERR "# here's what went wrong\n"
	 diag("here's what went wrong");

	 like  ($got, qr/expected/, $test_name);
	 unlike($got, qr/expected/, $test_name);

	 cmp_ok($got, '==', $expected, $test_name);

	 is_deeply($got_complex_structure, $expected_complex_structure, $test_name);

	 SKIP: {
	     skip $why, $how_many unless $have_some_feature;

	     ok( foo(),	      $test_name );
	     is( foo(42), 23, $test_name );
	 };

	 TODO: {
	     local $TODO = $why;

	     ok( foo(),	      $test_name );
	     is( foo(42), 23, $test_name );
	 };

	 can_ok($module, @methods);
	 isa_ok($object, $class);

	 pass($test_name);
	 fail($test_name);

	 BAIL_OUT($why);

	 # UNIMPLEMENTED!!!
	 my @status = Test::More::status;

DESCRIPTION
       STOP! If you're just getting started writing tests, have a look at
       Test::Simple first.  This is a drop in replacement for Test::Simple
       which you can switch to once you get the hang of basic testing.

       The purpose of this module is to provide a wide range of testing
       utilities.  Various ways to say "ok" with better diagnostics,
       facilities to skip tests, test future features and compare complicated
       data structures.	 While you can do almost anything with a simple "ok()"
       function, it doesn't provide good diagnostic output.

   I love it when a plan comes together
       Before anything else, you need a testing plan.  This basically declares
       how many tests your script is going to run to protect against premature
       failure.

       The preferred way to do this is to declare a plan when you "use
       Test::More".

	 use Test::More tests => 23;

       There are cases when you will not know beforehand how many tests your
       script is going to run.	In this case, you can declare your tests at
       the end.

	 use Test::More;

	 ... run your tests ...

	 done_testing( $number_of_tests_run );

       Sometimes you really don't know how many tests were run, or it's too
       difficult to calculate.	In which case you can leave off
       $number_of_tests_run.

       In some cases, you'll want to completely skip an entire testing script.

	 use Test::More skip_all => $skip_reason;

       Your script will declare a skip with the reason why you skipped and
       exit immediately with a zero (success).	See Test::Harness for details.

       If you want to control what functions Test::More will export, you have
       to use the 'import' option.  For example, to import everything but
       'fail', you'd do:

	 use Test::More tests => 23, import => ['!fail'];

       Alternatively, you can use the plan() function.	Useful for when you
       have to calculate the number of tests.

	 use Test::More;
	 plan tests => keys %Stuff * 3;

       or for deciding between running the tests at all:

	 use Test::More;
	 if( $^O eq 'MacOS' ) {
	     plan skip_all => 'Test irrelevant on MacOS';
	 }
	 else {
	     plan tests => 42;
	 }

       done_testing
	       done_testing();
	       done_testing($number_of_tests);

	   If you don't know how many tests you're going to run, you can issue
	   the plan when you're done running tests.

	   $number_of_tests is the same as plan(), it's the number of tests
	   you expected to run.	 You can omit this, in which case the number
	   of tests you ran doesn't matter, just the fact that your tests ran
	   to conclusion.

	   This is safer than and replaces the "no_plan" plan.

   Test names
       By convention, each test is assigned a number in order.	This is
       largely done automatically for you.  However, it's often very useful to
       assign a name to each test.  Which would you rather see:

	 ok 4
	 not ok 5
	 ok 6

       or

	 ok 4 - basic multi-variable
	 not ok 5 - simple exponential
	 ok 6 - force == mass * acceleration

       The later gives you some idea of what failed.  It also makes it easier
       to find the test in your script, simply search for "simple
       exponential".

       All test functions take a name argument.	 It's optional, but highly
       suggested that you use it.

   I'm ok, you're not ok.
       The basic purpose of this module is to print out either "ok #" or "not
       ok #" depending on if a given test succeeded or failed.	Everything
       else is just gravy.

       All of the following print "ok" or "not ok" depending on if the test
       succeeded or failed.  They all also return true or false, respectively.

       ok
	     ok($got eq $expected, $test_name);

	   This simply evaluates any expression ("$got eq $expected" is just a
	   simple example) and uses that to determine if the test succeeded or
	   failed.  A true expression passes, a false one fails.  Very simple.

	   For example:

	       ok( $exp{9} == 81,		    'simple exponential' );
	       ok( Film->can('db_Main'),	    'set_db()' );
	       ok( $p->tests == 4,		    'saw tests' );
	       ok( !grep !defined $_, @items,	    'items populated' );

	   (Mnemonic:  "This is ok.")

	   $test_name is a very short description of the test that will be
	   printed out.	 It makes it very easy to find a test in your script
	   when it fails and gives others an idea of your intentions.
	   $test_name is optional, but we very strongly encourage its use.

	   Should an ok() fail, it will produce some diagnostics:

	       not ok 18 - sufficient mucus
	       #   Failed test 'sufficient mucus'
	       #   in foo.t at line 42.

	   This is the same as Test::Simple's ok() routine.

       is
       isnt
	     is	 ( $got, $expected, $test_name );
	     isnt( $got, $expected, $test_name );

	   Similar to ok(), is() and isnt() compare their two arguments with
	   "eq" and "ne" respectively and use the result of that to determine
	   if the test succeeded or failed.  So these:

	       # Is the ultimate answer 42?
	       is( ultimate_answer(), 42,	   "Meaning of Life" );

	       # $foo isn't empty
	       isnt( $foo, '',	   "Got some foo" );

	   are similar to these:

	       ok( ultimate_answer() eq 42,	   "Meaning of Life" );
	       ok( $foo ne '',	   "Got some foo" );

	   "undef" will only ever match "undef".  So you can test a value
	   agains "undef" like this:

	       is($not_defined, undef, "undefined as expected");

	   (Mnemonic:  "This is that."	"This isn't that.")

	   So why use these?  They produce better diagnostics on failure.
	   ok() cannot know what you are testing for (beyond the name), but
	   is() and isnt() know what the test was and why it failed.  For
	   example this test:

	       my $foo = 'waffle';  my $bar = 'yarblokos';
	       is( $foo, $bar,	 'Is foo the same as bar?' );

	   Will produce something like this:

	       not ok 17 - Is foo the same as bar?
	       #   Failed test 'Is foo the same as bar?'
	       #   in foo.t at line 139.
	       #	  got: 'waffle'
	       #     expected: 'yarblokos'

	   So you can figure out what went wrong without rerunning the test.

	   You are encouraged to use is() and isnt() over ok() where possible,
	   however do not be tempted to use them to find out if something is
	   true or false!

	     # XXX BAD!
	     is( exists $brooklyn{tree}, 1, 'A tree grows in Brooklyn' );

	   This does not check if "exists $brooklyn{tree}" is true, it checks
	   if it returns 1.  Very different.  Similar caveats exist for false
	   and 0.  In these cases, use ok().

	     ok( exists $brooklyn{tree},    'A tree grows in Brooklyn' );

	   A simple call to isnt() usually does not provide a strong test but
	   there are cases when you cannot say much more about a value than
	   that it is different from some other value:

	     new_ok $obj, "Foo";

	     my $clone = $obj->clone;
	     isa_ok $obj, "Foo", "Foo->clone";

	     isnt $obj, $clone, "clone() produces a different object";

	   For those grammatical pedants out there, there's an "isn't()"
	   function which is an alias of isnt().

       like
	     like( $got, qr/expected/, $test_name );

	   Similar to ok(), like() matches $got against the regex
	   "qr/expected/".

	   So this:

	       like($got, qr/expected/, 'this is like that');

	   is similar to:

	       ok( $got =~ /expected/, 'this is like that');

	   (Mnemonic "This is like that".)

	   The second argument is a regular expression.	 It may be given as a
	   regex reference (i.e. "qr//") or (for better compatibility with
	   older perls) as a string that looks like a regex (alternative
	   delimiters are currently not supported):

	       like( $got, '/expected/', 'this is like that' );

	   Regex options may be placed on the end ('/expected/i').

	   Its advantages over ok() are similar to that of is() and isnt().
	   Better diagnostics on failure.

       unlike
	     unlike( $got, qr/expected/, $test_name );

	   Works exactly as like(), only it checks if $got does not match the
	   given pattern.

       cmp_ok
	     cmp_ok( $got, $op, $expected, $test_name );

	   Halfway between ok() and is() lies cmp_ok().	 This allows you to
	   compare two arguments using any binary perl operator.

	       # ok( $got eq $expected );
	       cmp_ok( $got, 'eq', $expected, 'this eq that' );

	       # ok( $got == $expected );
	       cmp_ok( $got, '==', $expected, 'this == that' );

	       # ok( $got && $expected );
	       cmp_ok( $got, '&&', $expected, 'this && that' );
	       ...etc...

	   Its advantage over ok() is when the test fails you'll know what
	   $got and $expected were:

	       not ok 1
	       #   Failed test in foo.t at line 12.
	       #     '23'
	       #	 &&
	       #     undef

	   It's also useful in those cases where you are comparing numbers and
	   is()'s use of "eq" will interfere:

	       cmp_ok( $big_hairy_number, '==', $another_big_hairy_number );

	   It's especially useful when comparing greater-than or smaller-than
	   relation between values:

	       cmp_ok( $some_value, '<=', $upper_limit );

       can_ok
	     can_ok($module, @methods);
	     can_ok($object, @methods);

	   Checks to make sure the $module or $object can do these @methods
	   (works with functions, too).

	       can_ok('Foo', qw(this that whatever));

	   is almost exactly like saying:

	       ok( Foo->can('this') &&
		   Foo->can('that') &&
		   Foo->can('whatever')
		 );

	   only without all the typing and with a better interface.  Handy for
	   quickly testing an interface.

	   No matter how many @methods you check, a single can_ok() call
	   counts as one test.	If you desire otherwise, use:

	       foreach my $meth (@methods) {
		   can_ok('Foo', $meth);
	       }

       isa_ok
	     isa_ok($object,   $class, $object_name);
	     isa_ok($subclass, $class, $object_name);
	     isa_ok($ref,      $type,  $ref_name);

	   Checks to see if the given "$object->isa($class)".  Also checks to
	   make sure the object was defined in the first place.	 Handy for
	   this sort of thing:

	       my $obj = Some::Module->new;
	       isa_ok( $obj, 'Some::Module' );

	   where you'd otherwise have to write

	       my $obj = Some::Module->new;
	       ok( defined $obj && $obj->isa('Some::Module') );

	   to safeguard against your test script blowing up.

	   You can also test a class, to make sure that it has the right
	   ancestor:

	       isa_ok( 'Vole', 'Rodent' );

	   It works on references, too:

	       isa_ok( $array_ref, 'ARRAY' );

	   The diagnostics of this test normally just refer to 'the object'.
	   If you'd like them to be more specific, you can supply an
	   $object_name (for example 'Test customer').

       new_ok
	     my $obj = new_ok( $class );
	     my $obj = new_ok( $class => \@args );
	     my $obj = new_ok( $class => \@args, $object_name );

	   A convenience function which combines creating an object and
	   calling isa_ok() on that object.

	   It is basically equivalent to:

	       my $obj = $class->new(@args);
	       isa_ok $obj, $class, $object_name;

	   If @args is not given, an empty list will be used.

	   This function only works on new() and it assumes new() will return
	   just a single object which isa $class.

       subtest
	       subtest $name => \&code;

	   subtest() runs the &code as its own little test with its own plan
	   and its own result.	The main test counts this as a single test
	   using the result of the whole subtest to determine if its ok or not
	   ok.

	   For example...

	     use Test::More tests => 3;

	     pass("First test");

	     subtest 'An example subtest' => sub {
		 plan tests => 2;

		 pass("This is a subtest");
		 pass("So is this");
	     };

	     pass("Third test");

	   This would produce.

	     1..3
	     ok 1 - First test
		 1..2
		 ok 1 - This is a subtest
		 ok 2 - So is this
	     ok 2 - An example subtest
	     ok 3 - Third test

	   A subtest may call "skip_all".  No tests will be run, but the
	   subtest is considered a skip.

	     subtest 'skippy' => sub {
		 plan skip_all => 'cuz I said so';
		 pass('this test will never be run');
	     };

	   Returns true if the subtest passed, false otherwise.

	   Due to how subtests work, you may omit a plan if you desire.	 This
	   adds an implicit "done_testing()" to the end of your subtest.  The
	   following two subtests are equivalent:

	     subtest 'subtest with implicit done_testing()', sub {
		 ok 1, 'subtests with an implicit done testing should work';
		 ok 1, '... and support more than one test';
		 ok 1, '... no matter how many tests are run';
	     };

	     subtest 'subtest with explicit done_testing()', sub {
		 ok 1, 'subtests with an explicit done testing should work';
		 ok 1, '... and support more than one test';
		 ok 1, '... no matter how many tests are run';
		 done_testing();
	     };

       pass
       fail
	     pass($test_name);
	     fail($test_name);

	   Sometimes you just want to say that the tests have passed.  Usually
	   the case is you've got some complicated condition that is difficult
	   to wedge into an ok().  In this case, you can simply use pass() (to
	   declare the test ok) or fail (for not ok).  They are synonyms for
	   ok(1) and ok(0).

	   Use these very, very, very sparingly.

   Module tests
       You usually want to test if the module you're testing loads ok, rather
       than just vomiting if its load fails.  For such purposes we have
       "use_ok" and "require_ok".

       use_ok
	      BEGIN { use_ok($module); }
	      BEGIN { use_ok($module, @imports); }

	   These simply use the given $module and test to make sure the load
	   happened ok.	 It's recommended that you run use_ok() inside a BEGIN
	   block so its functions are exported at compile-time and prototypes
	   are properly honored.

	   If @imports are given, they are passed through to the use.  So
	   this:

	      BEGIN { use_ok('Some::Module', qw(foo bar)) }

	   is like doing this:

	      use Some::Module qw(foo bar);

	   Version numbers can be checked like so:

	      # Just like "use Some::Module 1.02"
	      BEGIN { use_ok('Some::Module', 1.02) }

	   Don't try to do this:

	      BEGIN {
		  use_ok('Some::Module');

		  ...some code that depends on the use...
		  ...happening at compile time...
	      }

	   because the notion of "compile-time" is relative.  Instead, you
	   want:

	     BEGIN { use_ok('Some::Module') }
	     BEGIN { ...some code that depends on the use... }

	   If you want the equivalent of "use Foo ()", use a module but not
	   import anything, use "require_ok".

	     BEGIN { require_ok "Foo" }

       require_ok
	      require_ok($module);
	      require_ok($file);

	   Like use_ok(), except it requires the $module or $file.

   Complex data structures
       Not everything is a simple eq check or regex.  There are times you need
       to see if two data structures are equivalent.  For these instances
       Test::More provides a handful of useful functions.

       NOTE I'm not quite sure what will happen with filehandles.

       is_deeply
	     is_deeply( $got, $expected, $test_name );

	   Similar to is(), except that if $got and $expected are references,
	   it does a deep comparison walking each data structure to see if
	   they are equivalent.	 If the two structures are different, it will
	   display the place where they start differing.

	   is_deeply() compares the dereferenced values of references, the
	   references themselves (except for their type) are ignored.  This
	   means aspects such as blessing and ties are not considered
	   "different".

	   is_deeply() currently has very limited handling of function
	   reference and globs.	 It merely checks if they have the same
	   referent.  This may improve in the future.

	   Test::Differences and Test::Deep provide more in-depth
	   functionality along these lines.

   Diagnostics
       If you pick the right test function, you'll usually get a good idea of
       what went wrong when it failed.	But sometimes it doesn't work out that
       way.  So here we have ways for you to write your own diagnostic
       messages which are safer than just "print STDERR".

       diag
	     diag(@diagnostic_message);

	   Prints a diagnostic message which is guaranteed not to interfere
	   with test output.  Like "print" @diagnostic_message is simply
	   concatenated together.

	   Returns false, so as to preserve failure.

	   Handy for this sort of thing:

	       ok( grep(/foo/, @users), "There's a foo user" ) or
		   diag("Since there's no foo, check that /etc/bar is set up right");

	   which would produce:

	       not ok 42 - There's a foo user
	       #   Failed test 'There's a foo user'
	       #   in foo.t at line 52.
	       # Since there's no foo, check that /etc/bar is set up right.

	   You might remember "ok() or diag()" with the mnemonic "open() or
	   die()".

	   NOTE The exact formatting of the diagnostic output is still
	   changing, but it is guaranteed that whatever you throw at it it
	   won't interfere with the test.

       note
	     note(@diagnostic_message);

	   Like diag(), except the message will not be seen when the test is
	   run in a harness.  It will only be visible in the verbose TAP
	   stream.

	   Handy for putting in notes which might be useful for debugging, but
	   don't indicate a problem.

	       note("Tempfile is $tempfile");

       explain
	     my @dump = explain @diagnostic_message;

	   Will dump the contents of any references in a human readable
	   format.  Usually you want to pass this into "note" or "diag".

	   Handy for things like...

	       is_deeply($have, $want) || diag explain $have;

	   or

	       note explain \%args;
	       Some::Class->method(%args);

   Conditional tests
       Sometimes running a test under certain conditions will cause the test
       script to die.  A certain function or method isn't implemented (such as
       fork() on MacOS), some resource isn't available (like a net connection)
       or a module isn't available.  In these cases it's necessary to skip
       tests, or declare that they are supposed to fail but will work in the
       future (a todo test).

       For more details on the mechanics of skip and todo tests see
       Test::Harness.

       The way Test::More handles this is with a named block.  Basically, a
       block of tests which can be skipped over or made todo.  It's best if I
       just show you...

       SKIP: BLOCK
	     SKIP: {
		 skip $why, $how_many if $condition;

		 ...normal testing code goes here...
	     }

	   This declares a block of tests that might be skipped, $how_many
	   tests there are, $why and under what $condition to skip them.  An
	   example is the easiest way to illustrate:

	       SKIP: {
		   eval { require HTML::Lint };

		   skip "HTML::Lint not installed", 2 if $@;

		   my $lint = new HTML::Lint;
		   isa_ok( $lint, "HTML::Lint" );

		   $lint->parse( $html );
		   is( $lint->errors, 0, "No errors found in HTML" );
	       }

	   If the user does not have HTML::Lint installed, the whole block of
	   code won't be run at all.  Test::More will output special ok's
	   which Test::Harness interprets as skipped, but passing, tests.

	   It's important that $how_many accurately reflects the number of
	   tests in the SKIP block so the # of tests run will match up with
	   your plan.  If your plan is "no_plan" $how_many is optional and
	   will default to 1.

	   It's perfectly safe to nest SKIP blocks.  Each SKIP block must have
	   the label "SKIP", or Test::More can't work its magic.

	   You don't skip tests which are failing because there's a bug in
	   your program, or for which you don't yet have code written.	For
	   that you use TODO.  Read on.

       TODO: BLOCK
	       TODO: {
		   local $TODO = $why if $condition;

		   ...normal testing code goes here...
	       }

	   Declares a block of tests you expect to fail and $why.  Perhaps
	   it's because you haven't fixed a bug or haven't finished a new
	   feature:

	       TODO: {
		   local $TODO = "URI::Geller not finished";

		   my $card = "Eight of clubs";
		   is( URI::Geller->your_card, $card, 'Is THIS your card?' );

		   my $spoon;
		   URI::Geller->bend_spoon;
		   is( $spoon, 'bent',	  "Spoon bending, that's original" );
	       }

	   With a todo block, the tests inside are expected to fail.
	   Test::More will run the tests normally, but print out special flags
	   indicating they are "todo".	Test::Harness will interpret failures
	   as being ok.	 Should anything succeed, it will report it as an
	   unexpected success.	You then know the thing you had todo is done
	   and can remove the TODO flag.

	   The nice part about todo tests, as opposed to simply commenting out
	   a block of tests, is it's like having a programmatic todo list.
	   You know how much work is left to be done, you're aware of what
	   bugs there are, and you'll know immediately when they're fixed.

	   Once a todo test starts succeeding, simply move it outside the
	   block.  When the block is empty, delete it.

       todo_skip
	       TODO: {
		   todo_skip $why, $how_many if $condition;

		   ...normal testing code...
	       }

	   With todo tests, it's best to have the tests actually run.  That
	   way you'll know when they start passing.  Sometimes this isn't
	   possible.  Often a failing test will cause the whole program to die
	   or hang, even inside an "eval BLOCK" with and using "alarm".	 In
	   these extreme cases you have no choice but to skip over the broken
	   tests entirely.

	   The syntax and behavior is similar to a "SKIP: BLOCK" except the
	   tests will be marked as failing but todo.  Test::Harness will
	   interpret them as passing.

       When do I use SKIP vs. TODO?
	   If it's something the user might not be able to do, use SKIP.  This
	   includes optional modules that aren't installed, running under an
	   OS that doesn't have some feature (like fork() or symlinks), or
	   maybe you need an Internet connection and one isn't available.

	   If it's something the programmer hasn't done yet, use TODO.	This
	   is for any code you haven't written yet, or bugs you have yet to
	   fix, but want to put tests in your testing script (always a good
	   idea).

   Test control
       BAIL_OUT
	       BAIL_OUT($reason);

	   Indicates to the harness that things are going so badly all testing
	   should terminate.  This includes the running of any additional test
	   scripts.

	   This is typically used when testing cannot continue such as a
	   critical module failing to compile or a necessary external utility
	   not being available such as a database connection failing.

	   The test will exit with 255.

	   For even better control look at Test::Most.

   Discouraged comparison functions
       The use of the following functions is discouraged as they are not
       actually testing functions and produce no diagnostics to help figure
       out what went wrong.  They were written before is_deeply() existed
       because I couldn't figure out how to display a useful diff of two
       arbitrary data structures.

       These functions are usually used inside an ok().

	   ok( eq_array(\@got, \@expected) );

       "is_deeply()" can do that better and with diagnostics.

	   is_deeply( \@got, \@expected );

       They may be deprecated in future versions.

       eq_array
	     my $is_eq = eq_array(\@got, \@expected);

	   Checks if two arrays are equivalent.	 This is a deep check, so
	   multi-level structures are handled correctly.

       eq_hash
	     my $is_eq = eq_hash(\%got, \%expected);

	   Determines if the two hashes contain the same keys and values.
	   This is a deep check.

       eq_set
	     my $is_eq = eq_set(\@got, \@expected);

	   Similar to eq_array(), except the order of the elements is not
	   important.  This is a deep check, but the irrelevancy of order only
	   applies to the top level.

	       ok( eq_set(\@got, \@expected) );

	   Is better written:

	       is_deeply( [sort @got], [sort @expected] );

	   NOTE By historical accident, this is not a true set comparison.
	   While the order of elements does not matter, duplicate elements do.

	   NOTE eq_set() does not know how to deal with references at the top
	   level.  The following is an example of a comparison which might not
	   work:

	       eq_set([\1, \2], [\2, \1]);

	   Test::Deep contains much better set comparison functions.

   Extending and Embedding Test::More
       Sometimes the Test::More interface isn't quite enough.  Fortunately,
       Test::More is built on top of Test::Builder which provides a single,
       unified backend for any test library to use.  This means two test
       libraries which both use Test::Builder can be used together in the same
       program.

       If you simply want to do a little tweaking of how the tests behave, you
       can access the underlying Test::Builder object like so:

       builder
	       my $test_builder = Test::More->builder;

	   Returns the Test::Builder object underlying Test::More for you to
	   play with.

EXIT CODES
       If all your tests passed, Test::Builder will exit with zero (which is
       normal).	 If anything failed it will exit with how many failed.	If you
       run less (or more) tests than you planned, the missing (or extras) will
       be considered failures.	If no tests were ever run Test::Builder will
       throw a warning and exit with 255.  If the test died, even after having
       successfully completed all its tests, it will still be considered a
       failure and will exit with 255.

       So the exit codes are...

	   0		       all tests successful
	   255		       test died or all passed but wrong # of tests run
	   any other number    how many failed (including missing or extras)

       If you fail more than 254 tests, it will be reported as 254.

       NOTE  This behavior may go away in future versions.

CAVEATS and NOTES
       Backwards compatibility
	   Test::More works with Perls as old as 5.6.0.

       utf8 / "Wide character in print"
	   If you use utf8 or other non-ASCII characters with Test::More you
	   might get a "Wide character in print" warning.  Using "binmode
	   STDOUT, ":utf8"" will not fix it.  Test::Builder (which powers
	   Test::More) duplicates STDOUT and STDERR.  So any changes to them,
	   including changing their output disciplines, will not be seem by
	   Test::More.

	   The work around is to change the filehandles used by Test::Builder
	   directly.

	       my $builder = Test::More->builder;
	       binmode $builder->output,	 ":utf8";
	       binmode $builder->failure_output, ":utf8";
	       binmode $builder->todo_output,	 ":utf8";

       Overloaded objects
	   String overloaded objects are compared as strings (or in cmp_ok()'s
	   case, strings or numbers as appropriate to the comparison op).
	   This prevents Test::More from piercing an object's interface
	   allowing better blackbox testing.  So if a function starts
	   returning overloaded objects instead of bare strings your tests
	   won't notice the difference.	 This is good.

	   However, it does mean that functions like is_deeply() cannot be
	   used to test the internals of string overloaded objects.  In this
	   case I would suggest Test::Deep which contains more flexible
	   testing functions for complex data structures.

       Threads
	   Test::More will only be aware of threads if "use threads" has been
	   done before Test::More is loaded.  This is ok:

	       use threads;
	       use Test::More;

	   This may cause problems:

	       use Test::More
	       use threads;

	   5.8.1 and above are supported.  Anything below that has too many
	   bugs.

HISTORY
       This is a case of convergent evolution with Joshua Pritikin's Test
       module.	I was largely unaware of its existence when I'd first written
       my own ok() routines.  This module exists because I can't figure out
       how to easily wedge test names into Test's interface (along with a few
       other problems).

       The goal here is to have a testing utility that's simple to learn,
       quick to use and difficult to trip yourself up with while still
       providing more flexibility than the existing Test.pm.  As such, the
       names of the most common routines are kept tiny, special cases and
       magic side-effects are kept to a minimum.  WYSIWYG.

SEE ALSO
       Test::Simple if all this confuses you and you just want to write some
       tests.  You can upgrade to Test::More later (it's forward compatible).

       Test::Harness is the test runner and output interpreter for Perl.  It's
       the thing that powers "make test" and where the "prove" utility comes
       from.

       Test::Legacy tests written with Test.pm, the original testing module,
       do not play well with other testing libraries.  Test::Legacy emulates
       the Test.pm interface and does play well with others.

       Test::Differences for more ways to test complex data structures.	 And
       it plays well with Test::More.

       Test::Class is like xUnit but more perlish.

       Test::Deep gives you more powerful complex data structure testing.

       Test::Inline shows the idea of embedded testing.

       Bundle::Test installs a whole bunch of useful test modules.

AUTHORS
       Michael G Schwern <schwern@pobox.com> with much inspiration from Joshua
       Pritikin's Test module and lots of help from Barrie Slaymaker, Tony
       Bowden, blackstar.co.uk, chromatic, Fergal Daly and the perl-qa gang.

BUGS
       See http://rt.cpan.org to report and view bugs.

SOURCE
       The source code repository for Test::More can be found at
       http://github.com/schwern/test-more/.

COPYRIGHT
       Copyright 2001-2008 by Michael G Schwern <schwern@pobox.com>.

       This program is free software; you can redistribute it and/or modify it
       under the same terms as Perl itself.

       See http://www.perl.com/perl/misc/Artistic.html

perl v5.10.1			  2011-02-23		       Test::More(3pm)
[top]

List of man pages available for Raspbian

Copyright (c) for man pages and the logo by the respective OS vendor.

For those who want to learn more, the polarhome community provides shell access and support.

[legal] [privacy] [GNU] [policy] [cookies] [netiquette] [sponsors] [FAQ]
Tweet
Polarhome, production since 1999.
Member of Polarhome portal.
Based on Fawad Halim's script.
....................................................................
Vote for polarhome
Free Shell Accounts :: the biggest list on the net