unittests are really part of the build, not a special run

Mathias Lang via Digitalmars-d digitalmars-d at puremagic.com
Mon Mar 30 19:14:29 PDT 2015

2015-03-31 2:46 GMT+02:00 Andrei Alexandrescu via Digitalmars-d <
digitalmars-d at puremagic.com>:

> On 3/30/15 4:15 PM, Mathias Lang via Digitalmars-d wrote:
>> I'd rather see DMD automatically pass the expression that triggered the
>> error (as it is done in C) to replace this useless "Unittest failure"
>> that forces me to look through the code.
> Often you need the context.

Often, not always. You doesn't loose any information by displaying the

>  D has the advantage that it catches most errors at CT. You can write a
>> lot of code and just compile it to ensure it's more or less correct. I
>> often write code that won't pass the unittests, but I need to check if
>> my template / CT logic is correct. It may takes 20 compilations cycle
>> before I run the unittests. Running the tests as part of the build would
>> REALLY slow down the process -especially given that unittest is
>> communicated to imported module, which means imported libraries. You
>> don't want to catch unittests failures on every compilation cycle, but
>> rather before your code make it to the repo - that's what CI systems are
>> for -.
> I disagree.
> Andrei
As you are entitled to. But I don't see any argument here.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.puremagic.com/pipermail/digitalmars-d/attachments/20150331/0cf99507/attachment.html>

More information about the Digitalmars-d mailing list