Re: Named unittests

[Panke via Digitalmars-d]

On Monday, 30 March 2015 at 21:52:35 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu 
wrote:
We're having a strong need for named unittests at Facebook for 
multiple reasons.

1. We have sophisticated tooling that verifies whether 
unittests are flaky. The automated monitor (for e.g. C++) 
figures whether a given unittest fails several times across 
several commits. Unittests are identified by name; relying on 
file/line is impossible because the line of a failure is not 
stable across changes.

2. Again for efficient automated testing and flakiness 
detection, one should be able to run only a subset of unittests 
by mentioning them by line in the command line. Note that this 
implies there's no interdependency between distinct unittests, 
which is fine because the new ability is opt-on; I'd say is 
pure style anyway.

3. Mentioning unittest names in failure messages helps human 
communication (e.g. "AddPeer is failing after your change"). 
This is impossible with file and line numbers.

I'd like to make a DIP for named unittests. Who can help me 
with that?


Andrei

I've implemented this in a library and I'm sure others have as 
well. Are you sure, you want a language solution?