Parallel execution of unittests
Andrei Alexandrescu via Digitalmars-d
digitalmars-d at puremagic.com
Thu May 1 08:15:03 PDT 2014
On 5/1/14, 4:41 AM, Jacob Carlborg wrote:
> On 2014-04-30 22:41, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
>
>> Yah I think that's possible but I'd like the name to be part of the
>> function name as well e.g. unittest__%s.
>
> Why is that necessary? To have the correct symbol name when debugging?
It's nice to have the name available in other tools (stack trace, debugger).
> The Ruby syntax looks like this:
[snip]
> The unit test runner can also print out a documentation, basically all
> text in the "it" and "describe" parameters. Something like this:
> https://coderwall-assets-0.s3.amazonaws.com/uploads/picture/file/1949/rspec_html_screen.png
That's all nice, but I feel we're going gung ho with overengineering
already. If we give unittests names and then offer people a button
"parallelize unittests" to push (don't even specify the number of
threads! let the system figure it out depending on cores), that's a good
step to a better world.
Andrei
More information about the Digitalmars-d
mailing list