On Thursday, 14 August 2014 at 02:04:09 UTC, Idan Arye wrote:
Well, there's nothing to test in abstract functions, is there?
I'm more concerned about the unit test appearing before the
code, when the usual convention is to put the unit tests after
the code they are testing...
There is precedence conceptually for putting unittests before
code (TDD as an example of a technique that suggests unittests
should be written first). Plus, in some ways it makes sense that
unittests come first because it shows you how to use the function
in question. I often look at unittests for examples of how to use
code, almost like documentation (which also comes before the
code).
Not to mention the fact that we'd have to come up with new syntax
otherwise. The following is ambiguous:
void blah(T)(...)
in { ... }
body { ... }
unittest { ... }
Is the unittest
1. part of the module and thus should only be run once
or is it
2. part of the templated function and should be run per
instantiation?
Current behavior is 1. So it'd be really necessary to come up
with some new, unambiguous syntax to put the unittest after the
function. Whereas the current proposal doesn't create an
ambiguity and doesn't need new, special syntax to perform this
task.
