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