Breaking changes in Visual C++ 2015

[Chris via Digitalmars-d]

On Friday, 8 May 2015 at 13:31:38 UTC, Ola Fosheim Grøstad wrote:
> On Friday, 8 May 2015 at 08:45:07 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
>> On 5/8/2015 1:16 AM, "Ola Fosheim =?UTF-8?B?R3LDuHN0YWQi?= 
>> <ola.fosheim.grostad+dlang at gmail.com>" wrote:
>>> And people don't pick a language because of a testing 
>>> framework…
>>
>> Which is why I need to point out just how productivity 
>> boosting -unittest and -cov are.
>
> D unittests can be neat for simpler libraries, but they also 
> make code harder to browse. Phobos source code clearly suffers 
> from it.
>
> So I'd rather have them separate and have testing-support built 
> into the IDE instead. I find that cleaner as unit-tests are 
> actually not part of the semantical language, just part of the 
> D syntax...
>
> You are probably right that people use them more when they are 
> "shipped with the product", though. Whether you ship the 
> compiler or a bundle (IDE).

I like unittests in phobos and other libraries, because they 
immediately show me how to use the code, and I like how simple it 
is:

dub --build=unittest

or

dmd myfile.d -unittest

Be honest, have you written unittests for each your Python 
scripts, for each of your command line tools? D makes it easy for 
you.

The only drawback is that sometimes the logic of a program does 
not allow to test every little bit, especially when handling 
files is concerned. But overall D in general makes me more "code 
aware" in many respects, be it performance, code hygiene or 
re-usability. And it helps that the compiler ships with a lot of 
flags that help me to analyze my code.