Or, since constructors can have any name, what if you defined sub testing_constructor? This method would only be invoked by the module-testing code.
To my way of thinking, the tests of the base-class (having thus been made possible by this alternate, special-purpose constructor) would of course be limited to functionality that was strictly in the base ... and that could, meaningfully, be “tested” in such abstract isolation. (Resist the temptation to have “tests to have tests.” Tests must actually make sense.)
You might consider coding the abstract base-class so that it had such things as ... a new method that blew up, and stub-methods that also blew up. Just so that the abstract class wouldn’t do anything harmful if accidentally invoked in a senior moment brief episode of amnesia...
-
Are you posting in the right place? Check out Where do I post X? to know for sure.
-
Posts may use any of the Perl Monks Approved HTML tags. Currently these include the following:
<code> <a> <b> <big>
<blockquote> <br /> <dd>
<dl> <dt> <em> <font>
<h1> <h2> <h3> <h4>
<h5> <h6> <hr /> <i>
<li> <nbsp> <ol> <p>
<small> <strike> <strong>
<sub> <sup> <table>
<td> <th> <tr> <tt>
<u> <ul>
-
Snippets of code should be wrapped in
<code> tags not
<pre> tags. In fact, <pre>
tags should generally be avoided. If they must
be used, extreme care should be
taken to ensure that their contents do not
have long lines (<70 chars), in order to prevent
horizontal scrolling (and possible janitor
intervention).
-
Want more info? How to link or
or How to display code and escape characters
are good places to start.
|
