https://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=12269
--- Comment #3 from [email protected] 2014-02-27 18:12:29 PST --- Thanks for the clarification. As I understand it this is the situation: Within a template unittests will be silently ignored by the compiler unless another unittest, outside the template scope, instantiates that template. Is it really a good idea? To treat unittests like regular functions w.r.t templates regarding how/when they're compiled. IMO all unittests should be lifted to module scope by the compiler, excepting static-if and version() blocks. This way there would be no unittests that are missed because a template was not instantiated. This all came about because someone elsewhere in the code removed an one line that instantiated S. We were blissfully unaware that most of out S unittests were not actually being compiled, let alone executed. A simple mistake but it happens. Thanks, ed -- Configure issuemail: https://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
