Author: Jay Bonci <jaybonci@debian.org>
Description: Patch from Era Eriksson to clean up some manpage language
Bug-Debian: #322351
Forwarded: https://rt.cpan.org/Ticket/Display.html?id=49519
Reviewed-by: Nicholas Bamber <nicholas@periapt.co.uk>
Last-Update: 2010-09-22
--- a/Warn.pm
+++ b/Warn.pm
@@ -15,7 +15,7 @@
   warning_like  {foo(-dri => "/")} qr/unknown param/i, "an unknown parameter test";
   warnings_like {bar(1,1)} [qr/width.*small/i, qr/height.*small/i];
 
-  warning_is    {foo()} {carped => "didn't found the right parameters"};
+  warning_is    {foo()} {carped => "didn't find the right parameters"};
   warnings_like {foo()} [qr/undefined/,qr/undefined/,{carped => qr/no result/i}];
 
   warning_like {foo(undef)}                 'uninitialized';
@@ -31,9 +31,9 @@
 
 A good style of Perl programming calls for a lot of diverse regression tests.
 
-This module provides a few convenience methods for testing warning based code.
+This module provides a few convenience methods for testing warning based-code.
 
-If you are not already familiar with the Test::More manpage 
+If you are not already familiar with the L<Test::More> manpage, 
 now would be the time to go take a look.
 
 =head2 FUNCTIONS
@@ -42,29 +42,28 @@
 
 =item warning_is BLOCK STRING, TEST_NAME
 
-Tests that BLOCK gives exactly the one specified warning.
-The test fails if the BLOCK warns more then one times or doesn't warn.
+Tests that BLOCK gives the specified warning exactly once.
+The test fails if the BLOCK warns more than once or does not warn at all.
 If the string is undef, 
 then the tests succeeds if the BLOCK doesn't give any warning.
-Another way to say that there aren't any warnings in the block,
-is C<warnings_are {foo()} [], "no warnings in">.
+Another way to say that there are no warnings in the block
+is C<warnings_are {foo()} [], "no warnings">.
 
-If you want to test for a warning given by carp,
-You have to write something like:
+If you want to test for a warning given by Carp
+you have to write something like:
 C<warning_is {carp "msg"} {carped =E<gt> 'msg'}, "Test for a carped warning">.
-The test will fail,
-if a "normal" warning is found instead of a "carped" one.
+The test will fail if a "normal" warning is found instead of a "carped" one.
 
 Note: C<warn "foo"> would print something like C<foo at -e line 1>. 
-This method ignores everything after the at. That means, to match this warning
+This method ignores everything after the "at". Thus to match this warning
 you would have to call C<warning_is {warn "foo"} "foo", "Foo succeeded">.
 If you need to test for a warning at an exactly line,
-try better something like C<warning_like {warn "foo"} qr/at XYZ.dat line 5/>.
+try something like C<warning_like {warn "foo"} qr/at XYZ.dat line 5/>.
 
 warning_is and warning_are are only aliases to the same method.
 So you also could write
 C<warning_is {foo()} [], "no warning"> or something similar.
-I decided to give two methods to have some better readable method names.
+I decided to give two methods the same name to improve readability.
 
 A true value is returned if the test succeeds, false otherwise.
 
@@ -74,32 +73,32 @@
 =item warnings_are BLOCK ARRAYREF, TEST_NAME
 
 Tests to see that BLOCK gives exactly the specified warnings.
-The test fails if the BLOCK warns a different number than the size of the ARRAYREf
-would have expected.
+The test fails if the warnings from BLOCK are not exactly the ones in ARRAYREF.
 If the ARRAYREF is equal to [], 
 then the test succeeds if the BLOCK doesn't give any warning.
 
 Please read also the notes to warning_is as these methods are only aliases.
 
-If you want more than one tests for carped warnings look that way:
+If you want more than one test for carped warnings, try this:
 C<warnings_are {carp "c1"; carp "c2"} {carped => ['c1','c2'];> or
 C<warnings_are {foo()} ["Warning 1", {carped => ["Carp 1", "Carp 2"]}, "Warning 2"]>.
-Note that C<{carped => ...}> has always to be a hash ref.
+Note that C<{carped => ...}> must always be a hash ref.
 
 =item warning_like BLOCK REGEXP, TEST_NAME
 
-Tests that BLOCK gives exactly one warning and it can be matched to the given regexp.
+Tests that BLOCK gives exactly one warning and it can be matched by
+the given regexp.
 If the string is undef, 
 then the tests succeeds iff the BLOCK doesn't give any warning.
 
-The REGEXP is matched after the whole warn line,
-which consists in general of "WARNING at __FILE__ line __LINE__".
-So you can check for a warning in at File Foo.pm line 5 with
+The REGEXP is matched against the whole warning line,
+which in general has the form "WARNING at __FILE__ line __LINE__".
+So you can check for a warning in the file Foo.pm on line 5 with
 C<warning_like {bar()} qr/at Foo.pm line 5/, "Testname">.
-I don't know whether it's sensful to do such a test :-(
-However, you should be prepared as a matching with 'at', 'file', '\d'
+Perhaps it is not sensible to perform such a test;
+however, you should be aware that matching on a sweeping regular expression
 or similar will always pass. 
-Think to the qr/^foo/ if you want to test for warning "foo something" in file foo.pl.
+Consider qr/^foo/ if you want to test for warning "foo something" in file foo.pl.
 
 You can also write the regexp in a string as "/.../"
 instead of using the qr/.../ syntax.
@@ -107,7 +106,7 @@
 as strings without slashes are reserved for warning categories
 (to match warning categories as can be seen in the perllexwarn man page).
 
-Similar to C<warning_is>,
+As with C<warning_is>,
 you can test for warnings via C<carp> with:
 C<warning_like {bar()} {carped => qr/bar called too early/i};>
 
@@ -123,17 +122,17 @@
 Tests whether a BLOCK gives exactly one warning of the passed category.
 The categories are grouped in a tree,
 like it is expressed in perllexwarn.
-Note, that they have the hierarchical structure from perl 5.8.0,
-wich has a little bit changed to 5.6.1 or earlier versions
-(You can access the internal used tree with C<$Test::Warn::Categorization::tree>, 
-although I wouldn't recommend it)
+Note that they have the hierarchical structure from perl 5.8.0,
+you can access the internal hierarchy with
+C<$Test::Warn::Categorization::tree>,
+although it isn't recommended).
 
 Thanks to the grouping in a tree,
-it's simple possible to test for an 'io' warning,
-instead for testing for a 'closed|exec|layer|newline|pipe|unopened' warning.
+it's possible to test simply for an 'io' warning,
+instead of testing for a 'closed|exec|layer|newline|pipe|unopened' warning.
 
-Note, that warnings occuring at compile time,
-can only be catched in an eval block. So
+Note that compile-time warnings
+can only be caught in an eval block. So
 
   warning_like {eval q/"$x"; $x;/} 
                [qw/void uninitialized/], 
@@ -142,9 +141,8 @@
 will work,
 while it wouldn't work without the eval.
 
-Note, that it isn't possible yet,
-to test for own categories,
-created with warnings::register.
+Note also that it isn't yet possible
+to test for categories you created yourself with C<warnings::register>.
 
 =item warnings_like BLOCK ARRAYREF, TEST_NAME
 
@@ -164,7 +162,7 @@
                  {carped => qr/bar warning/i},
                  'io'
                 ],
-                "I hope, you'll never have to write a test for so many warnings :-)";
+                "I hope you'll never have to write a test for so many warnings :-)";
 
 =item warnings_exist BLOCK STRING|ARRAYREF, TEST_NAME
 
@@ -189,32 +187,32 @@
 
 =head1 BUGS
 
-Please note that warnings with newlines inside are making a lot of trouble.
-The only sensible way to handle them is to use are the C<warning_like> or
-C<warnings_like> methods. Background for these problems is that there is no
-really secure way to distinguish between warnings with newlines and a tracing
+Please note that warnings with newlines inside are very awkward.
+The only sensible way to handle them is to use the C<warning_like> or
+C<warnings_like> methods. The background is that there is no
+really safe way to distinguish between warnings with newlines and a
 stacktrace.
 
-If a method has it's own warn handler,
+If a method has its own warn handler,
 overwriting C<$SIG{__WARN__}>,
 my test warning methods won't get these warnings.
 
-The C<warning_like BLOCK CATEGORY, TEST_NAME> method isn't extremely tested.
-Please use this calling style with higher attention and
-tell me if you find a bug.
+The C<warning_like BLOCK CATEGORY, TEST_NAME> method isn't fully tested.
+Please take note if you use this this calling style,
+and report any bugs you find.
 
 =head1 TODO
 
 Improve this documentation.
 
 The code has some parts doubled - especially in the test scripts.
-This is really awkward and has to be changed.
+This is really awkward and must be changed.
 
-Please feel free to suggest me any improvements.
+Please feel free to suggest improvements.
 
 =head1 SEE ALSO
 
-Have a look to the similar L<Test::Exception> module. Test::Trap
+Have a look to the similar L<Test::Exception> module. L<Test::Trap>
 
 =head1 THANKS
 
