{"action":"created","issue":{"url":"https://api.github.com/repos/TestAnything/Specification/issues/11","labels_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/TestAnything/Specification/issues/11/labels{/name}","comments_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/TestAnything/Specification/issues/11/comments","events_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/TestAnything/Specification/issues/11/events","html_url":"https://github.com/TestAnything/Specification/issues/11","id":55071793,"number":11,"title":"Attach diagnostics to tests","user":{"login":"Leont","id":50472,"avatar_url":"https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/u/50472?v=3","gravatar_id":"","url":"https://api.github.com/users/Leont","html_url":"https://github.com/Leont","followers_url":"https://api.github.com/users/Leont/followers","following_url":"https://api.github.com/users/Leont/following{/other_user}","gists_url":"https://api.github.com/users/Leont/gists{/gist_id}","starred_url":"https://api.github.com/users/Leont/starred{/owner}{/repo}","subscriptions_url":"https://api.github.com/users/Leont/subscriptions","organizations_url":"https://api.github.com/users/Leont/orgs","repos_url":"https://api.github.com/users/Leont/repos","events_url":"https://api.github.com/users/Leont/events{/privacy}","received_events_url":"https://api.github.com/users/Leont/received_events","type":"User","site_admin":false},"labels":[],"state":"open","locked":false,"assignee":null,"milestone":null,"comments":4,"created_at":"2015-01-21T20:22:32Z","updated_at":"2015-01-21T23:02:56Z","closed_at":null,"body":"Currently, tests and diagnostics are entirely decoupled from a parsing point of view. The obvious approach of trying to parse a diagnostic after a test line fails is not streaming friendly, which is rather undesirable.\r\n\r\nWe should solve this somehow. Possible solutions are:\r\n\r\n1. Always require a diagnostic\r\n2. Add a marker after the description (much like directives)\r\n3. Always require diagnostic after a failure (and maybe on success too if given a pragma)\r\n\r\nProbably there are other viable approaches too. I think I'd prefer option 3."},"comment":{"url":"https://api.github.com/repos/TestAnything/Specification/issues/comments/70940177","html_url":"https://github.com/TestAnything/Specification/issues/11#issuecomment-70940177","issue_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/TestAnything/Specification/issues/11","id":70940177,"user":{"login":"Leont","id":50472,"avatar_url":"https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/u/50472?v=3","gravatar_id":"","url":"https://api.github.com/users/Leont","html_url":"https://github.com/Leont","followers_url":"https://api.github.com/users/Leont/followers","following_url":"https://api.github.com/users/Leont/following{/other_user}","gists_url":"https://api.github.com/users/Leont/gists{/gist_id}","starred_url":"https://api.github.com/users/Leont/starred{/owner}{/repo}","subscriptions_url":"https://api.github.com/users/Leont/subscriptions","organizations_url":"https://api.github.com/users/Leont/orgs","repos_url":"https://api.github.com/users/Leont/repos","events_url":"https://api.github.com/users/Leont/events{/privacy}","received_events_url":"https://api.github.com/users/Leont/received_events","type":"User","site_admin":false},"created_at":"2015-01-21T23:02:56Z","updated_at":"2015-01-21T23:02:56Z","body":"> Again I feel I am missing you point though.\r\n\r\nYou have to wait until the next result before you can process it. Which is IMHO against the streaming philosophy of TAP, as well as being an annoying processing complication."}}