std.unittests for (final?) review

[Jens Mueller]

bearophile wrote:
> 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.

I mean the same.
"I like the basic built-in support for unit testing in D but more
advanced testing should be implemented in a module ideally leading to
something like GoogleTest for D."

Advanced features should be implemented on top of the built-in one.
Specifically they should not be put into the core language.
Sorry for my bad wording.

Jens