[phobos] Silent failure of std.container unittests

[Walter Bright]

Sean Kelly wrote:
>
>
> Right.  I was proposing that ModuleInfo have a list of unittest modules instead of a reference to a single function which calls them each in turn (ie. finer granularity).  I've already taken care of the assert behavior on my local machine, but I don't want to commit the change unless it's what people want.  I thought that since you reverted my unittest changes yesterday that non-throwing asserts might actually be desired.
> _______________________________________________
>
>   

There isn't a right answer. The overwhelming feedback I received prior 
to 2.44 was that all the unittests should run, and then the program 
should exit if any of them failed, and that's what I implemented. I 
think that also makes a lot of sense - if there are a lot, simply 
redirect them to a file and then fix the ones you want to, all in one 
go. I don't think it is a big problem to ignore messages from tests that 
are redundant.

The other tenable option is to allow at most one unittest failure per 
module. Or one per unittest block. Either way, we'll get complaints. I 
suggest we go with the "run them all".