On 1/25/14, 7:55 PM, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
There's this simple realization that unittests could (should?) be considered an intrinsic part of the build process. In order for an executable to be worth running, it should pass the regular semantic checks and also the unittests, which in a sense are extended semantic checks that fall outside the traditional charter of the compiler.
I can imagine someone who discovered a bug late at night, has a fix and needs to upload the new executable as soon as possible: he quickly comments all failing unit tests to make them pass. The next morning he uncomments them and fixes them with tranquility.
