On Sunday, February 08, 2015 18:08:31 Walter Bright via Digitalmars-d wrote: > On 2/8/2015 5:52 PM, Jakob Ovrum wrote: > > On Monday, 9 February 2015 at 01:41:33 UTC, Walter Bright wrote: > >> Anyone interested in taking up this flag? > > > > Is this idea different from the one in std.internal.test.dummyrange? > > I wasn't aware of the existence of that. Will check it out.
It's a nice start, but it's far too limited IMHO, since it only defines a very restricted subset of range types (though it's certainly better than nothing). I started implementing a more full-featured solution (one which would allow you to define any combination of range types - bidirectional with length, without length, infinite, etc.), but I ran into either compiler bugs or library bugs IIRC, and it fell by the wayside. Regardless, I think that we should create a general solution which allows you to instantiate the full combination of range types (as well as specifying a reasonable subsets for those who want decent coverage but don't want to test every combination) and which can be used in anyone's code rathear than just in Phobos. And perhaps, a package containing a variety of unit test helpers is in order, where a module handling ranges would be just one of the modules therein. - Jonathan M Davis
