[phobos] Silent failure of std.container unittests

[Sean Kelly]

Hm... I think this can be fixed with a library change. I'll look into it tonight. 

Sent from my iPhone

On Jul 13, 2010, at 8:24 AM, Andrei Alexandrescu <andrei at erdani.com> wrote:

> There are other problems with the current approach, which make it a net pessimization:
> 
> 1. assert() has different semantics at top level (straight inside the unittest) vs. everywhere else (e.g. in functions called by the unittest). That sucks.
> 
> 2. assert() does not abort the current unittest. It continues soldering on, even though code insite a given unittest commonly assumes that continued execution implies success of the previous asserts.
> 
> I protested when Walter introduced this disastrous semantics. He said, "let's let it be for a while and see how it fares." Now "a while" has passed. The feature fared badly. It is worse than before.
> 
> By this I kindly ask that either things are improved by fixing both 1 and 2 above, or the old semantics are enacted.
> 
> Walter, I understand you don't routinely test Phobos. Please also understand that I test Phobos all the time. You are making my and others' life difficult for no good reason.
> 
> 
> Andrei
> 
> On 07/13/2010 10:13 AM, Steve Schveighoffer wrote:
>> isn't this just a bug?  I don't think the original unit test mode (where any
>> assert ends the whole program, with no stack trace) is a step forward.
>> 
>> Can't we just fix the bugs?
>> 
>> -Steve
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> ----- Original Message ----
>>> From: Andrei Alexandrescu<andrei at erdani.com>
>>> To: Discuss the phobos library for D<phobos at puremagic.com>
>>> Sent: Tue, July 13, 2010 10:57:24 AM
>>> Subject: Re: [phobos] Silent failure of std.container unittests
>>> 
>>> Walter, Sean - I'm asking again, please bring unittests back where they
>>> were. The recent change to assert() semantics has cause a net
>>> pessimization of everyone's  efficiency.
>>> 
>>> Thanks,
>>> 
>>> Andrei
>>> 
>>> On 07/13/2010 07:09 AM, Lars  Tandle Kyllingstad wrote:
>>>> I'm using Linux too, and DMD 2.047.  I've  investigated this some more.
>>>> Compilation of the std.container unittests  succeeds, but the executable
>>>>  generated/posix/debug/unittest/std/container terminates with exit status
>>>>  1.  Its main() function never runs.
>>>> 
>>>>  -Lars
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> On Mon, 2010-07-12 at 09:18 -0500, Andrei  Alexandrescu wrote:
>>>>> Can't reproduce on  Linux.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Andrei
>>>>> 
>>>>> On 07/12/2010  08:55 AM, Lars Tandle Kyllingstad wrote:
>>>>>> When running 'make  unittest' on the latest revision of Phobos, it just
>>>>>> fails  on/after std.container, without any sensible error  message:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Testing  generated/posix/debug/unittest/std/container
>>>>>> make[1]: ***  [generated/posix/debug/unittest/std/container] Error 1
>>>>>> make: ***  [unittest] Error 2
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Anyone else seeing  this?
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> -Lars
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>  _______________________________________________
>>>>>> phobos mailing  list
>>>>>> phobos at puremagic.com
>>>>>>  http://lists.puremagic.com/mailman/listinfo/phobos
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>  _______________________________________________
>>>> phobos mailing  list
>>>> phobos at puremagic.com
>>>> http://lists.puremagic.com/mailman/listinfo/phobos
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> phobos  mailing list
>>> phobos at puremagic.com
>>> http://lists.puremagic.com/mailman/listinfo/phobos
>>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> phobos mailing list
>> phobos at puremagic.com
>> http://lists.puremagic.com/mailman/listinfo/phobos
> _______________________________________________
> phobos mailing list
> phobos at puremagic.com
> http://lists.puremagic.com/mailman/listinfo/phobos