[tap-l] User Supplied YAML Diagnostic Keys: Descriptive Version

[Steffen Schwigon]

Michael G Schwern <schwern at pobox.com> writes:
> Ovid wrote:
>> --- Steffen Schwigon <ss5 at renormalist.net> wrote:
>>> And we are talking about the diagnostics part, which is primarily for
>>> the user, so the rules are reversed there.
>> There are two goals we want:
>> 1.  Make it as human-readable as possible.
>> 2.  Maximize flexibility.
>> As for human-readable, consider these:
>>   results:
>>       tap-have: 4
>>       tap-want: 5
>
> <mccoy>It's worse than that, Jim.</mccoy>
>
>     tap-results:
>         tap-have: 4
>         tap-want: 5
>
> tap tap tap tap tap.

Then maybe I haven't understood what the standardization of
diagnostics is about.

I thought it is primarily meant for the *user* of TAP to transport its
own diagnostics of its own test runs and test results?

I for instance would use it to transport benchmark results inside
tests.

I hadn't expected much of *TAP* specific stuff there. So the above
horror scenario with "tap tap tap everywher" is not really happening.

Or are the YAMLis keys of diagnostics expected to transport all what
current typical Test::* modules provide? This would include, for
instance, all the diagnostics that may result of 

  is
  ok
  is_deeply
  like
  isa_ok
  file_exists
  file_empty
  file_size
  file_max_size (min)
  file_readable (executable)
  file_mode
  file_is_symlink
  owner
  test_verbose
  lives_ok
  dies_ok
  critic_ok
  all_critic_ok
  all_code_files

and many more.

This is probably not what standardization of keys withing diagnostics
is about. Or is it?

Can you give me examples what keys you try to standardize as part of
TAP inside diagnostics?

I interpret the examples of TAP13 with "data", "expect", "got" in

  http://podwiki.hexten.net/podwiki.pl?page=TAP13

as "user keys", i.e. *not* standardized as TAP.

Steffen
-- 
Steffen Schwigon <ss5 at renormalist.net>
Dresden Perl Mongers <http://dresden-pm.org/>
Deutscher Perl-Workshop <http://www.perl-workshop.de/>