[dmd-internals] What is the point of runnable/testdate.d?

[Brad Roberts]

On Sunday, August 14, 2011 12:45:44 PM, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
>>From what I can tell, it's just testing std.date. I would have thought that 
> that's the sort of testing that you'd do in std.date, not dmd. And since 
> std.date has now been deprecated, it seems that that's breaking dmd's tests.
> 
> So, does these tests need to be rewritten for std.datetime, or should we just 
> get rid ouf them? I don't understand why the tests exist in the first place. 
> It's the sort of thing that I would have expected to see in std.date, not dmd.
> 
> - Jonathan M Davis

Primarily historical accident of how/where walter evolved things.  
There's little value in removing tests that work since there's little 
guarantee (without careful evaluation) that there actually are 
duplicate tests elsewhere.  As code is rearranged and deprecated, 
removing worthless parts is worth doing.

btw, why do you repeat your self so much in most of your emails?  It 
makes them extra wordy and longer than n
ecessary.  Feels like some bad 
training from academia.

Shrug,
Brad