|Think about Loose Coupling|
Excellent! Now we are getting somewhere...
Next question: Are you free to modify the test() routine? If so, it would probably be good to show us the whole routine (if it is not too long).
Or are you stuck with it as-is and asking how (without changing the test() routine) to get around its requirement for a filename when you want to pass it a string of data instead?
UPDATE: As I understand your response below, you want to leave the test() routine untouched and get around its requirement for a filename so you can pass it a string of data instead.
That is the messier option. I am out of time so I have to run. If I were faced with this and really needed to do what you describe, I would write a little routine that wrote an array to a file so I could do something like:
Where array2file wrote the data to the file in proper form and returned the name of that file so that the test() routine would get what it needed to do its work.
If that is *really* what you want, perhaps someone else will offer some code. Sorry, gotta run.