On Thursday, 22 March 2018 at 16:54:18 UTC, Anton Fediushin wrote:
On Thursday, 22 March 2018 at 16:30:37 UTC, H. S. Teoh wrote:
As for the dub-specific problems introduced by
version(unittest): IMO that's a flaw in dub. I should not
need to contort my code just to accomodate some flaw in dub.
Having said that, though, I do agree that version(unittest)
itself is a bad idea, so code written the way I recommend
would not have this problem even given dub's flaws.
There's no "dub-specific problems". Article is wrong about
that: when you run `dub test` only package you are working with
is compiled with '-unittest' option. This way it is
_impossible_ to have any kind of problems with
`version(unittest)` if you are writing libraries
IMHO dub does it exactly right - I most definitely do _not_ want
to build my dependencies's unittests, nor do I want to run them.
Imagine if I had to parse and run the tests from libclang or Qt
(worse: both!) every time I wrote a C++ program...
Atila
