|No such thing as a small change|
Re^2: RFC: How did I do writing my first test?by Lady_Aleena (Curate)
|on Sep 24, 2020 at 16:28 UTC||Need Help??|
Testing files that end with newlines was suggested here. I would remove those tests and happily only have one temp file for all the tests.
I am having a hard time visualizing the tests in subroutines. I am also willing to expand the variable names. I was being a bit lazy when I wrote them. ($n_fh, $n_file) becomes ($newline_fh, $newline_file); ($no_n_fh, $no_n_file) becomes ($no_newline_fh, $no_newline_file). However, if the tests for files ending with a newline are removed, I will just use the ($fh, $fn) from line 84. I will push the test with the expanded variable names shortly after posting this.
I will think about changing the name, however, I do not like the word slurp.
Putting my POD in separate files came about several weeks ago. I was writing up usage of a site specific module for myself, finally, in a separate file. I was going to save it as text. All it needed was a little formatting, so I added the POD formatting to it. I saved it as .pod, committed it, and pushed it to GitHub. Out of curiosity, I looked at it on GitHub and was happy to see the POD was rendered into HTML. Since it is easier to read when rendered as HTML, I decided to do it for all my modules. The only time I ever read a Perl document with perldoc is when I am checking to see what my POD looks like. Otherwise, I read the Perl and module documentation in a browser (perldoc.perl.org or metacpan.org). So, since GitHub will render .pod as HTML, making it easier to read, I thought to myself, "Why not?". Also, perldoc My::Module still works whether the POD is embedded or separate. I checked.
My OS is Debian 10 (Buster); my perl versions are 5.28.1 local and 5.16.3 or 5.30.0 on web host depending on the shebang.
No matter how hysterical I get, my problems are not time sensitive. So, relax, have a cookie, and a very nice day!