On Monday, 21 October 2013 at 12:24:18 UTC, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
I know that you can extend the built-in facilities by overriding how assert
works and the like.

Overriding assert is dangerous because changes behavior of program itself and lacks context data. Own test runner implemented using __traits(getUnittests) is perfectly safe.

since it's frequently for nonsense like making it so that the tests continue
after an assertion fails (which is outright bad practice IMHO),

It is absolutely necessary feature in any big project of you want to keep reasonable edit-build cycle times. Tests are always hierarchical naturally, there is no reason to stop the world if completely unrelated ones fail.

I have a very
low opinion of attempts to override the built-in assert for unit tests.

You are right here but it is not needed anymore.

But I really don't see any problem with the built-in
unit tests facilities and would expect to be against any such submission,

There is nothing wrong with built-in ones, just some higher-level tools on top of them are lacking.

But I guess
that we'll just have to wait and see what gets submitted for review, if

Exactly, lets argue in time ;)

Reply via email to