Better assert's status? (Was: Proposal for std.path replacement)

[Nick Sabalausky]

"Jonathan M Davis" <jmdavisProg at gmx.com> wrote in message 
news:mailman.2297.1299478837.4748.digitalmars-d at puremagic.com...
> On Sunday 06 March 2011 21:57:30 Nick Sabalausky wrote:
>> "Jonathan M Davis" <jmdavisProg at gmx.com> wrote in message
>> news:mailman.2293.1299467610.4748.digitalmars-d at puremagic.com...
>>
>> > I _was_ thinking of putting forward a new proposal which includes the
>> > unit testing functionality that assertPred had which won't end up in an
>> > improved
>> > assert,
>>
>> Speaking of which: Now that assertPred has been rejected on the grounds 
>> of
>> an improved assert that doesn't yet exist, what is the current status of
>> the improved assert?
>
> There's an enhancement request for it:
>
> http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=5547
>
> I have no idea of any work is actually being done on it or not. It hasn't
> actually been assigned to anyone yet, for whatever that's worth. Honestly, 
> it
> wouldn't surprise me if it doesn't happen for a while. I'm not sure that 
> anyone
> who is capable of doing it is particularly motivated to do it (though I'm 
> not
> sure that they're _not_ either). It was clear that a number of people 
> wanted
> assert to be smarter rather than having assertPred, but it isn't clear 
> that
> assert is going to be made smarter any time soon. I suspect that it will 
> be a
> while before it's done. We'll have to wait and see though.
>

Yea, that's what I figured, and that's why I was strongly in favor of 
assertPred despite the "promise" of assert improvements.

You're the sole author of assertPred, right? Do you mind if I include it in 
my zlib/libpng-licensed SemiTwist D Tools library ( 
http://www.dsource.org/projects/semitwist ) ? I already have an 
assert-alternative in there, but assertPred is vastly superior. (Although, 
my assert-alternative does save a list of failures instead of immediately 
throwing, which I personally find to be essential for unittests, so I would 
probably add the *optional* ability to have assertPred do the same.)