Pod-Coverage reviews

cpanratings
 

RSS | Module Info | Add a review of Pod-Coverage

Pod-Coverage (0.18) ****

Darn useful! Even though Test::Pod::Coverage usually bites me just when I think I'm ready to release a module, I still love it. It saves me from sending a lot of undocumented code into the wild -- and this is the code that makes it go.

Ricardo Signes - 2007-05-08T19:07:25 (permalink)

3 out of 3 found this review helpful. Was this review helpful to you?  Yes No

Pod-Coverage (0.17) ****

It's great, but it's easy to misunderstand the interface and use it incorrectly so that it looks like a module passes Pod::Coverage tests when it doesn't.

Also, there are no hooks to handle inheritence. If a Foo isa('Bar'), then when Foo has methods which override those of Bar, Pod::Coverage doesn't recognize this. Sometimes that's expected behavior: maybe you should odcument exactly what's changed. But sometimes you document it differently, and do not want to list every updated method. It would be nice if there was an option to recognize when this occurs and ignore them.

Robert Rothenberg - 2005-04-03T16:32:30 (permalink)

Was this review helpful to you?  Yes No

Pod-Coverage (0.12) *****

Pod::Coverage is a very useful module that, when used in another module's test suite, should help improve that modules documentation by a great deal. Of course, developers are free to insert empty documentation stubs for their methods, but those willing to do that don't need Pod::Coverage to remind them of the lacking documentation in the first place.

Steffen Müller - 2003-10-05T01:49:29 (permalink)

2 out of 2 found this review helpful. Was this review helpful to you?  Yes No

Pod-Coverage (0.12) *****

Nice module that allows you to check whether your subroutines are documented with POD. Very useful in test suites to make sure you keep everything documented.

Adrian Howard - 2003-10-01T06:34:20 (permalink)

1 out of 1 found this review helpful. Was this review helpful to you?  Yes No