[phobos] Silent failure of std.container unittests

[Andrei Alexandrescu]

On 07/14/2010 04:43 PM, Walter Bright wrote:
> 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".

Sounds good to me. I got things to "fail successfully" now. Never been 
so happy about something failing.

Andrei