in reply to Breaking Test::Differences

Does anyone object to me breaking this? Are there any problems that I haven't thought of? (There usually are).

You appear to be fond of breaking things for no reason other than you found something chipped. I suggest you ask those who use Test::Differences directly.

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^2: Breaking Test::Differences
by Ovid (Cardinal) on Aug 04, 2008 at 09:18 UTC

    It's so safe to be anonymous, isn't it? It means you get be wrong and not have anyone know who you are. At least when I'm wrong, I'm willing to put my name on it.

    It's not chipped, it's broken. Has been a for a long time and there was a patch sitting in the queue for this problem (a problem that has bitten me and many other individuals). My only hope is to fix the broken equality test and the only change is to clean up the diagnostics, something which isn't machine-readable anyway.

      I am not the person you replied to, but I will respond to your attack on anonymity.

      I registered on once. I can’t remember my password. I can never be bothered to go through the “e-mail me my password” dance just to post a comment. I wish supported openid.

      I never say in the text of a comment who I am, because anyone could claim to be me.

        I've no objection to people posting anonymously. There's nothing wrong with that and your post was just fine. I've every objection to people posting anonymously and being rude. That's cowardice and it's typical of the juvenile attitude which has overrun so much of the 'net.

      It's not chipped, it's broken.

      If its that clear cut, why do you need to ask for objections?

      I didn't see the rudeness (no, I'm not who you replied to either). However, I will choose to be anonymous this time so I can minimize how much I have to deal with your immaturity at dealing with criticism.

      "chipped" is a form of "broken". I don't know anything about what personal "fondness"es you might or might not have, but I'll try to make part of the original point clearer to you, This looks very much like shattering something because it was chipped.

      And a patch that fixes comparison between numbers and numeric strings but breaks comparison of nesting levels sounds more like replacing some small fundamental cog with a side-effect of fixing a particular bug. It seems unlikely that it wouldn't be possible to more directly fix the bug and not introduce such a different bug.

      If you feel the need to fundamentally change the whole heart of the module, you should probably start by making the "new world order" version an option (and an opt-in one at that).

        "chipped" is a form of "broken"

        Um, chipped is cosmetic damage (like a scratch on a car), broken is functional damage (broken axel, car inoperable).