On Thursday, 20 September 2012 at 18:31:38 UTC, Jacob Carlborg
wrote:
On 2012-09-20 13:14, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
On Thursday, September 20, 2012 12:34:50 Johannes Pfau wrote:
But it should be possible.
I'm not arguing that it shouldn't be possible. I'm just
pointing out that it
wouldn't really be useful. You have to build at least two
versions of your
library anyway (one with -unittest and one without), so being
forced to build
your library as a binary for unit tests really isn't a big
deal IMHO. But I
have no problem with it working to link in a library built
with -unittest and
have its unit tests run.
You'll most likely have a release and debug version anyway.
Just put the unit tests in the debug version.
I have the same issue.
My point is related to IDE usage, I need provide a library for my
samples projects and for users. I don't want have to create 2
projects of my "library" one with a main and one without, because
in this case each time I add or remove a file I need do this
manipulation for both projects.
I try the "-main" option of dmd that need "add default main()
(e.g. for unittesting)", reading it like that I though it was
exactly to be able to put a library project as executable.
PS : I am using VisualD and MonoD.
I also searched if it is possible to create one d file that
imports all my library sources just like we do with a #include
"build-all.c".
Sadly we can't create a Visual project that contains only D
sources without any building steps, instead we could put this
project of files references as dependency. All samples projects
would be build with the library code.
