Re: Inverting test conditions in Test::More ?

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^2: Inverting test conditions in Test::More ? by LanX (Saint) on Jul 24, 2020 at 09:30 UTC
As I said > > Not looking for workarounds for is_deeply but for general test logic. Cheers Rolf _{(addicted to the Perl Programming Language :) Wikisyntax for the Monastery}	[reply]
Re^3: Inverting test conditions in Test::More ? by Corion (Patriarch) on Jul 24, 2020 at 13:00 UTC
What part of "instead of checking whether there is any difference, check for a specific difference" is specific to `is_deeply` and not general test logic?	[reply] [d/l]
Re^4: Inverting test conditions in Test::More ? by LanX (Saint) on Jul 24, 2020 at 13:08 UTC
> What part of "instead of checking whether there is any difference, check for a specific difference" is specific to is_deeply and not general test logic? well you spoke specifically about is_deeply > > > You won't need is_deeply I think my demo of a workaround shows what I wanted, since all tests are returning a boolean result. Cheers Rolf _{(addicted to the Perl Programming Language :) Wikisyntax for the Monastery}	[reply]
Re^5: Inverting test conditions in Test::More ? by Corion (Patriarch) on Jul 24, 2020 at 13:24 UTC
Re^6: Inverting test conditions in Test::More ? by LanX (Saint) on Jul 24, 2020 at 13:36 UTC
Some notes below your chosen depth have not been shown here
Re^3: Inverting test conditions in Test::More ? by perlfan (Vicar) on Jul 24, 2020 at 12:54 UTC
Sounds like you're just trying to illicit specific responses. Better to just come out and say what you want to say rather than attempt to be coy about it.	[reply]


Pathologically Eclectic Rubbish Lister
	PerlMonks