[tap-l] What's with verbose rewriting the TAP?

[Andy Armstrong]

On 18 Feb 2009, at 20:54, Ovid wrote:
>> From: Michael G Schwern <schwern at pobox.com>
>
>> I've just noticed another instance of "prove -v" rewriting the TAP  
>> so that
>> you're not really seeing what the test output.
>
> Mea culpa.  I did that when I first wrote TAP::Parser to ensure a  
> nice, consistent output showing the end-user what TAP::Parser is  
> interpreting each TAP line as.
>
> So yeah, I could see this being an issue.  Should we have --raw to  
> show the original TAP?  Or --normalize to show what TAP::Parser is  
> intending?  I think Schwern is right that we should show the actual  
> output by default.  (/me wonders if this will break any tools  
> relying on the new parser)


Yeah, I wonder that too. Since nobody else has ever complained about  
the munging we do I'd lean towards adding a --raw option rather than  
changing the behaviour of -v.

Getting raw output should be easy - call raw() on the result objects  
instead of as_string().

-- 
Andy Armstrong, Hexten