Should unittests run as logical part of compilation?

[Andrei Alexandrescu]

On 1/26/14 10:08 PM, H. S. Teoh wrote:
> On Sun, Jan 26, 2014 at 08:15:23PM -0800, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
>> On 1/26/14 8:08 PM, Jesse Phillips wrote:
>>> On Monday, 27 January 2014 at 03:58:54 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
>>>> Yeppers. One other thought I had was to define a special flag e.g.
>>>> --4c5ad7908c2aa1b3de32ea25968cdf49 that says "just run unittests".
>>>
>>> I really think it would be better to use
>>> --4c5ad7908c2aa1b3de42ea25968cdf49 instead, it just makes the intent
>>> clearer.
>>
>> I'm just saying it should not clash with any application argument.
> [...]
>
> That won't work if the application is a git client looking for an SHA
> hash argument...

Of course it works unless there's a clash with this particular SHA.

> Let's not add arbitrary things like this to D programs, it doesn't
> address the issue and only introduces needless special cases.

I don't see that a special case. The only idea here is to produce one 
single debug executable containing unittests and running them on demand 
(e.g. by the build system).



Andrei