Parallel execution of unittests

[Dicebot via Digitalmars-d]

On Monday, 5 May 2014 at 16:33:42 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
> On 5/5/14, 8:55 AM, Dicebot wrote:
>>
>> It was just a most simple example. "Unittests should do no I/O 
>> because
>> any sort of I/O can fail because of reasons you don't control 
>> from the
>> test suite" is an appropriate generalization of my statement.
>>
>> Full /tmp is not a problem, there is nothing broken about 
>> system with
>> full /tmp. Problem is test reporting that is unable to connect 
>> failure
>> with /tmp being full unless you do environment verification.
>
> Different strokes for different folks. -- Andrei

There is nothing subjective about it. It is a very well-define 
practical goal - getting either reproducible or informative 
reports for test failures from machines you don't have routine 
access to. Why still keeping test sources maintainable (ok this 
part is subjective).  It is relatively simple engineering problem 
but you discard widely adopted solution for it (strict control of 
test requirements) without proposing any real alternative. "I 
will yell at someone when it breaks" is not really a solution.