Continuous Integration

[Christopher Wright]

Jason House wrote:
> Christopher Wright wrote:
> 
>> Jason House wrote:
>>> I'm sensitive to per-unittest code-writing overhead, but already have
>>> some in my code. If DUnit offers comparable overhead, and enhanced
>>> functionality, I'll switch.
>> DUnit uses test fixture classes, so it probably won't suit you at
>> present. I'll look into a method with less overhead.
> 
> Hmmm... maybe :(
> 
> Would this be possible?
> 
> unittest{
>   mixin DUnitTest!("My test name",
>   {
>     ...// my code
>   });
> }

Yes. I initially had some issues with alias parameters and delegates, 
but those seem to have disappeared. You wouldn't want to put that in a 
unittest block, though, since it's redundant and would give me, and by 
extension you, less control.

You'd also need to either version out your main function or call 
dunit_main from yours when running tests.