ModuleInfo, factories, and unittesting

[Piotrek via Digitalmars-d]

On Friday, 23 December 2016 at 14:06:24 UTC, Adam D. Ruppe wrote:
> Have you seen my filthy hack for getting individual unittests 
> to continue on failure? 
> http://stackoverflow.com/a/40896271/1457000

I have to say you are a master of D hacks :)
This code can potentially reprogram a CPU and break my HW!

pragma(joking, off).

> It'd be a lot easier though to just actually get the compiler 
> or library to do it. There's so many ways, I personally like 
> the RTInfo for modules approach, it is easy to implement, easy 
> to customize per project, and gives us access to the CT 
> features. But there's others too.

And that's why I said *quick development*. In theory, I can add 
any feature to any language by myself with a certain level of 
investment. But it's not the reality for 99,999% (all poor and 
lazy) programmers.

In result I have to accept small obstacles and go on. Otherwise I 
wouldn't go anywhere.

So the real question is: what can we do and what should we do 
with the current amount of resources we have?

Personally I can also be involved in development of new 
(important in my opinion) enhancements to one of the greatest 
features in D, i.e. built in uinttesting.

I'm even opting for changing the compiler if it's necessary (like 
expanding "-unittest" switch). But of course limiting to DRuntime 
only would be a step forward anyway.

I wonder what Walter thinks about it now, because as far as I 
remember he was against build-in unittest improvements.

Cheers,
Piotrek