You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
It might be neat to have a command-line argument that can accept a URL to test. This would make it somewhat easier to run quick tests. Currently you can create a text file that contains only URL and then pass that. For example:
We want to make sure that any command-line arguments we add don't limit future features.
Two, we currently expect expectations input files to be a required and implicit command-line argument, so we'd need to make sure we test and account for any behavior changes.
Three, any command-line URL argument would likely be limited to HTTP 200 responses and could not do additional tests, such as checking HTML or HTTP headers.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
It might be neat to have a command-line argument that can accept a URL to test. This would make it somewhat easier to run quick tests. Currently you can create a text file that contains only URL and then pass that. For example:
test.txt
contents:Then you can test this with:
Instead, we could have something like this:
However, this might be a bit messy for a few reasons.
One, we potentially want to support "remote expectations" via URL, so that you could do something like this:
We want to make sure that any command-line arguments we add don't limit future features.
Two, we currently expect expectations input files to be a required and implicit command-line argument, so we'd need to make sure we test and account for any behavior changes.
Three, any command-line URL argument would likely be limited to HTTP 200 responses and could not do additional tests, such as checking HTML or HTTP headers.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: