On Wed, May 22, 2013 at 10:19 AM, Nick Sabalausky < [email protected]> wrote:
> On Wed, 22 May 2013 10:06:46 -0700 > Timothee Cour <[email protected]> wrote: > > > it's only module level granularity. > > > > I agree that a library solution is the way to go, however there needs > > to be a way to have finer granularity, ie being able to call > > individual unittests. I gave the reasons in the 2nd post in this > > thread. Syntax would be: unittest(test_fun){...} > > having a short syntax such as this will make people use it. > > > > digressing, I wish there would be a simple non-anonymous way to vote > > for such features, to see whether most people agree/disagree. It's > > easier than voting by email, which invariably gets lost in > > digressions (as I'm doing here). > > > > Bugzilla has a voting system <http://d.puremagic.com/issues/>. Every > user has up to 10 votes to place on whatever tickets they want. > > I'm aware of that and used it. I find it limited (voting limits, no -1) and harder to use than necessary. It should be a 1 click operation.
