CURL Wrapper: Congratulations Next up: std.serialize

[Jonathan M Davis]

On Saturday, December 31, 2011 16:04:12 Jacob Carlborg wrote:
> It would be possible to implement named unit tests only in library code.
> It would not have as nice syntax as if it was implemented in the
> language but still possible.
> 
> In Ruby on Rails I run single unit tests all the time. Why would I run
> all the unit tests, which can take five minutes, when I just can run one
> unit test and it takes just one second?
> 
> When your doing test/behavior driven development (T/BDD) it's certainly
> nice to be able to run single unit tests, because you run it all the time.

Yes. I agree that it would be nice, but for it to be done at all cleanly, the 
language, compiler, and druntime need to be improved to make it possible. 
However, at least syntactically, such changes should be completely backwards 
compatible, so they can be added at a future date. Regardless, I don't think 
that it's a problem that Phobos should be trying to solve.

- Jonathan M Davis