std.container: RedBlackTree questions

[Ivan Kazmenko]

On Thursday, 1 August 2013 at 12:55:30 UTC, John Colvin wrote:
> On Thursday, 1 August 2013 at 12:27:51 UTC, Ivan Kazmenko wrote:
>> On a relevant note, I find the unittests of RedBlackTree a bit 
>> excessive even when they compile successfully.  They seem to 
>> test the integrity of the whole tree every time a tree 
>> operation takes place, and that makes the unittests version of 
>> my local code run too slowly.  Is there a way to turn 
>> unittests on only for user code and turn them off for the 
>> standard library?
>>
>> Ivan Kazmenko.
>
> Unless you've compiled phobos with -unittest, the unittests in 
> the standard library won't even exist in the binary, let alone 
> take up time to run.
>
> Unless... I'm mistaken and actually for some bizarre reason 
> unittests get dragged in from the import files, but that seems 
> very unlikely.

There is a
> version(unittest) version = RBDoChecks;
line and the following
> version(RBDoChecks) check();
calls in the tree implementation.
Perhaps the approach is special to RedBlackTree.

I agree that RBDoChecks can be useful occasionally, for example, 
when there is a bug in comparison function.  But I would be happy 
if the aforementioned line is removed from the library, or at 
least a way to override it is provided.