@evilham What I dislike about TAP is that it doesn't allow "grouping" of tests (sometimes called "test suites" in other protocols). That would be quite useful for converting all test results of my project eg. into JUnit format and passing it to Jenkins in a single result file.
IIRC I finally added some ad-hoc "section" keyword to my TAP producer and consumer, but I think deviating from the specification is not pretty either.
@evilham Also, the raw TAP output of a large unit test can be pretty unwieldy if printed to terminal. Getting nice human-readable output instead, like from Google Test, is quite useful.
@ollibaba huh, good to know about the current limitations. The nice thing about TAP though is that it seems easy to expand it.
For what I am going to use it (automated validation of graphical documentation) though it's just the right kind of thing, and this is a field where open standards shine through its absence.
That's why it's particularly useful that TAP is not *just* about testing software, because not everything is software, and software can change.
chaos.social – a Fediverse instance for & by the Chaos community