Closed karenetheridge closed 8 years ago
I also found this in my irc logs from a while back:
10:40 < ether> I'd also remove Test::NoWarnings, as its usecases are becoming extremely limited in comparison to the alternatives now
10:41 < ether> I wrote Test::Warnings a few years ago out of frustration
10:44 < osfameron> good idea
I vote yes.
+1
Test::Warnings was written to be a drop-in replacement for Test::NoWarnings that also allows one to use
done_testing
without running into plan issues; it also covers the interfaces provided by Test::Warn (which Test::Most dragged in).I'm mostly indifferent as to whether Test::FailWarnings is also included (as in PR#3).
(I vote yes on the first paragraph.)