Grokbase Groups Perl scripts May 2001
FAQ
I would like to request a new category called Test. If the
multi-file scripts thing can be resolved or if I take the
time to make a single file out of it, I'd like to put my
HTTPtest.pl script in this category.

The script implements a configuration file controlled
regression test system for the HTTP protocol. I'm also
looking at ways to extend this design to deal with other
request/response protocols.

I think "Test" would make a more useful category than
my other idea "HTTP".

Is there any interest?

G. Wade
--
"any technology sufficiently advanced is indistinguishable
from a Perl script." -- Programming Perl, 2nd ed.

Search Discussions

  • Rich Bowen at May 16, 2001 at 10:55 am

    On Tue, 15 May 2001 22:52:48 -0500, G. Wade Johnson said:

    I would like to request a new category called Test. If the
    multi-file scripts thing can be resolved or if I take the
    time to make a single file out of it, I'd like to put my
    HTTPtest.pl script in this category.

    The script implements a configuration file controlled
    regression test system for the HTTP protocol. I'm also
    looking at ways to extend this design to deal with other
    request/response protocols.

    I think "Test" would make a more useful category than
    my other idea "HTTP".

    Is there any interest?
    No. Test is just too generic. HTTP makes more sense, or perhaps something
    related to the fact that it is a multi-protocol thingy - perhaps it should go
    in the alread-existing Networking category. Things should be categorized by
    useful categories, not huge amorphous ones.

    WRT multi-file scripts, no, that does not work yet.

    --
    Rich Bowen - rbowen@rcbowen.com
    As we trace our own few circles around the sun
    We get it backwards and our seven years go by like one
    Dog Years (Rush - Test for Echo - 1999)
  • G. Wade Johnson at May 16, 2001 at 11:32 pm

    Rich Bowen wrote:

    On Tue, 15 May 2001 22:52:48 -0500, G. Wade Johnson said:
    I would like to request a new category called Test. If the
    multi-file scripts thing can be resolved or if I take the
    time to make a single file out of it, I'd like to put my
    HTTPtest.pl script in this category.

    The script implements a configuration file controlled
    regression test system for the HTTP protocol. I'm also
    looking at ways to extend this design to deal with other
    request/response protocols.

    I think "Test" would make a more useful category than
    my other idea "HTTP".

    Is there any interest?
    No. Test is just too generic. HTTP makes more sense, or perhaps something
    related to the fact that it is a multi-protocol thingy - perhaps it should go
    in the alread-existing Networking category. Things should be categorized by
    useful categories, not huge amorphous ones.

    WRT multi-file scripts, no, that does not work yet.

    --
    Rich Bowen - rbowen@rcbowen.com
    As we trace our own few circles around the sun
    We get it backwards and our seven years go by like one
    Dog Years (Rush - Test for Echo - 1999)
    If there's a strong reaction, the category HTTP would be fine with
    me.

    In defense of my suggestion, I was thinking of paralleling the
    Test::Harness Perl module, or something.

    Any other comments?

    G. Wade
    --
    "any technology sufficiently advanced is indistinguishable
    from a Perl script." -- Programming Perl, 2nd ed.
  • Rich Bowen at May 17, 2001 at 2:58 am

    On Wed, 16 May 2001 18:31:24 -0500, G. Wade Johnson said:
    No. Test is just too generic. HTTP makes more sense, or perhaps something
    related to the fact that it is a multi-protocol thingy - perhaps it should go
    in the alread-existing Networking category. Things should be categorized by
    useful categories, not huge amorphous ones.

    WRT multi-file scripts, no, that does not work yet.
    ..
    In defense of my suggestion, I was thinking of paralleling the
    Test::Harness Perl module, or something.

    Any other comments?
    My opinions are just my opinions, and don't necessarily reflect the official
    position of "the scripts committee". Kurt would be the final word on this.

    --
    Rich Bowen - rbowen@rcbowen.com
    ReefKnot - http://www.reefknot.org
  • Kurt D. Starsinic at May 17, 2001 at 3:13 am

    On Wed, May 16, 2001 at 10:57:57PM -0400, Rich Bowen wrote:
    On Wed, 16 May 2001 18:31:24 -0500, G. Wade Johnson said:
    No. Test is just too generic. HTTP makes more sense, or perhaps something
    related to the fact that it is a multi-protocol thingy - perhaps it should go
    in the alread-existing Networking category. Things should be categorized by
    useful categories, not huge amorphous ones.

    WRT multi-file scripts, no, that does not work yet.
    ..
    In defense of my suggestion, I was thinking of paralleling the
    Test::Harness Perl module, or something.

    Any other comments?
    My opinions are just my opinions, and don't necessarily reflect the official
    position of "the scripts committee". Kurt would be the final word on this.
    Rich, you're a committee member in good standing, and your opinion
    counts just as much as mine (IMHO). I do agree that Test is quite
    generic for a script. Script categories probably won't exactly parallel
    module categories -- a central tenet of a script is that it's specific,
    whereas modules are usually more generic.

    Wade, it sounds like you're developing some very generic functionality.
    Have you considered making a module of it, and including your example
    script(s) in the distribution?

    - Kurt
  • Wade Johnson at May 17, 2001 at 1:15 pm
    -----Original Message-----
    From: Kurt D. Starsinic
    Sent: Wednesday, May 16, 2001 10:13 PM
    To: Rich Bowen
    Cc: scripts@perl.org
    Subject: Re: Request for a new script category

    Wade, it sounds like you're developing some very generic functionality.
    Have you considered making a module of it, and including your example
    script(s) in the distribution?

    - Kurt

    Actually, I have. It is my preferred method of getting around the
    multi-file scripts problem. However, as many of you have pointed out,
    there seems to be a general lack of tuits.

    I'd like to develop at least one more script using this functionality
    before attempting to generalize it and I just have not found the time.

    G. Wade

Related Discussions

Discussion Navigation
viewthread | post
Discussion Overview
groupscripts @
categoriesperl
postedMay 16, '01 at 3:54a
activeMay 17, '01 at 1:15p
posts6
users4
websiteperl.org

People

Translate

site design / logo © 2021 Grokbase