unittest "name" {}

[Andrew]

On Saturday, 11 February 2023 at 21:10:15 UTC, Bradley Chatha 
wrote:
> On Saturday, 11 February 2023 at 20:05:38 UTC, max haughton 
> wrote:
>> That being said I am in favour of the language dictating that 
>> a string in a UDA on a unittest has special meaning (i.e. is a 
>> name or description)
>
> Wouldn't that only really be useful if the compiler had better 
> support for named unittests, e.g. `-test-filer=yada`, or 
> `-test-output=pretty (similar to silly or something like that)`?
>
> Or am I missing the point entirely here :D

In my opinion, the compiler doesn't really need to be responsible 
for all the bells and whistles in a modern testing framework; it 
just compiles code or it complains when it can't.

The issue is that we as a community haven't rallied around a 
single best testing framework which expands upon the basic 
`unittest` functionality. Atila's "unit-threaded" might be the 
best contender so far, but it's not unanimous like pytest for 
python or junit for java.