in reply to A brief question about testing/best practices
To amplify what choroba and davido said, unit tests would be those for your classes and methods (probably, depends on how isolated they are) and testing the “glue” as you say would be system testing. Here’s a naïve skeleton to do both that ought to help you get your head around it and some ways to organize it–
use strictures; # strict + fatal warnings use Test::More; use Capture::Tiny "capture"; ok 1, "1 is ok"; # Test simple truthiness. diag "Dialog always shows"; note "Notes show when running verbose tests"; # Isolate a batch of tests into a subtest. subtest "My unit tests" => sub { require_ok("DBI"); # Use your own package here. # Test methods/subs in as minimalistic/decoupled a way as possible +. done_testing(1); # + whatever you add. }; subtest "My system tests" => sub { my ( $out, $err, $exit ) = capture { system qw/ ls -l -A -f /; # Your program/glue here instead. }; is $exit, 0, "Executed normally"; ok ! $err, "Without errors"; like $out, qr/\n-rw/, "Found some read/write nodes... very clumsily"; done_testing(3); }; done_testing(3);
moo@cow[44]~/>prove pm-1113898 -v pm-1113898 .. ok 1 - 1 is ok # Notes show when running verbose tests # Subtest: My unit tests # Dialog always shows ok 1 - require DBI; 1..1 ok 2 - My unit tests # Subtest: My system tests ok 1 - Executed normally ok 2 - Without errors ok 3 - Found some read/write nodes... very clumsily 1..3 ok 3 - My system tests 1..3 ok All tests successful. Files=1, Tests=3, 0 wallclock secs ( 0.02 usr 0.01 sys + 0.04 cusr + 0.00 csys = 0.07 CPU) Result: PASS
Further suggested reading: Re: why Test::More? (my $horn; $horn->toot;), Capture::Tiny, Test::Most.
(Update: fixed spelling of minimalistic+decoupled in code comment.)
|
---|
Replies are listed 'Best First'. | |
---|---|
Re^2: A brief question about testing/best practices
by Amblikai (Scribe) on Jan 20, 2015 at 20:33 UTC | |
by Your Mother (Archbishop) on Jan 20, 2015 at 20:43 UTC |
In Section
Seekers of Perl Wisdom