Re: bailing out in tap tests nearly always a bad idea - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: bailing out in tap tests nearly always a bad idea
Date
Msg-id 2910254.1644861521@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: bailing out in tap tests nearly always a bad idea  (Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>)
Responses Re: bailing out in tap tests nearly always a bad idea  (Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net>)
List pgsql-hackers
Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de> writes:
> Even just getting rid of the "Tests were run but no plan was declared and
> done_testing() was not seen." noise would be helpful. So I think using a fatal
> error routine that forced a failure to be recognized via ok(0, 'fatal error')
> and then does done_testing() would be better...

Maybe we could do something in an END block provided by Utils.pm?
I still think that insisting that people avoid die() is going to
be annoying.

            regards, tom lane



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: Mark all GUC variable as PGDLLIMPORT
Next
From: Maciek Sakrejda
Date:
Subject: Re: warn if GUC set to an invalid shared library