Possible solution for export : `unittest export`?

[Dominikus Dittes Scherkl via Digitalmars-d]

On Tuesday, 1 September 2015 at 12:55:11 UTC, Benjamin Thaut 
wrote:
> While your proposal sounds interresting to start with I don't 
> like some of the implications:
>
> 1) You force people to write unittest. If people don't write a 
> export unittest block their templates won't work across shared 
> library boundaries.
Not writing unittests is a bad idea anyway.
Much more so if you want to ship your code as library!

> 2) A template in D might get __very__ complex. To make sure 
> that each and every function needed is actually exported your 
> unittests would need to have 100% coverage. Looking at some of 
> the template code in phobos this won't be any more fun than 
> manually putting export in front of every required function.
Oh yes, it's much more fun, because you get something very 
valueable in return: 100% coverage!
The more complex the template gets, the more valueable such a 
unittest becomes.
Especially in phobos I pretty much expect such unittests to 
already exist. What a shame if not so!