std.unittests for (final?) review

[bearophile]

Jens Mueller:

> I agree with bearophile. Unit testing can be implemented on top of the
> language and shouldn't be put into it.

This is not what I have said. I was talking about option IV I have explained here:
http://www.digitalmars.com/webnews/newsgroups.php?art_group=digitalmars.D&article_id=107997

This means I accept the built-in unit test system, but I think it's wrong to make it do everything you want from an unit test system. So the built-in one has to give the basic features (like giving a name to each unit test) that are later used by the library-defined unit test system.

Bye,
bearophile