I've released a new version of Test::MockObject. One of the nice things about documenting your code (or, I suppose, writing an article about it) is that if you find something you really don't want to explain, or cannot explain simply, it's usually a good sign that you need to rethink the bits in question.
Besides that, Ovid and his company have been using the module for testing their wacky deadline POS project. They've found some bugs too (a couple of them just after I did), and he has suggested some improvements that made their way into version 0.07. I'm pretty happy with the idea of next_call(), as it'll make some of my test code even shorter and easier to write.
It's also nice to have other people using my code. I like knowing that, for example, the printable display on a Slash-based site runs on code I wrote. As I told one of my students last night, "I like the idea that I've earned the right to use the free software I've been using."
I like this ethic, I really do, but doesn't it imply that those who can't contribute have no 'right' to use the software?
I guess you could extend this such that those who don't contribute to free software directly have a responsibility to use it, report bugs and spread the word. That's how they give back.
Re:Good ethic, but...
chromatic on 2002-06-22T17:51:20
I try to apply that ethic only to myself, but if my students pick up on it, that's also good. If someone's using something I've written, I would like to know. If there's a problem, a bug description or even a patch is nice. If it works, I'm ecstatic to hear that it's saving time and trouble.
Maybe I'm just restating the idea of "giving back". Certainly knowing what it takes to get even a small piece of free software tested, written, documented, and packaged makes me more patient with other authors.
Re:Good ethic, but...
pudge on 2002-06-24T14:48:56
Yeah, but Slash::Print sucked, I had to rewrite the whole thing.
Just kidding.:-) Thanks!
