unittest "name" {}

[Steven Schveighoffer]

On 2/16/23 6:16 PM, Guillaume Piolat wrote:
> On Thursday, 16 February 2023 at 15:36:25 UTC, Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
>>
>> I actually prefer without the quotes. Why? Because it matches what we 
>> currently do:
>>
>> struct foo
>> class bar
>> unittest baz
>>
> 
> OTOH you give name to structs and classes _because_ you need the names 
> elsewere. What is this elsewhere that needs unittests identifiers? I'm 
> still not getting it.

The only legitimate reason I can see is to run specific unittests by 
naming them at runtime. Or for the stack trace to look pretty.

But I'm ok with running all the unittests in a module. And you can do 
that without any language changes today.

Like I said, I don't think anything needs to change. But if such a 
feature absolutely has to be added, I'd vote for a symbol and not a string.

-Steve