On Tuesday, 31 March 2015 at 12:33:31 UTC, Steven Schveighoffer
wrote:
On 3/30/15 5:58 PM, Dicebot wrote:
I'd prefer putting alternative test runner into Phobos instead
which
will support `@name("Something") unittest { }`
Yes, this is one of the benefits I touted 2 years ago when I
asked for module RTInfo -- we can use this information in the
runtime to instrument how we run unit tests.
We still don't have module RTInfo.
And yes, then it can be a library solution. unittests are a
language feature, but only in how they are compiled and linked.
The runtime is fully responsible for how they are run. All we
need is a way to tell the compiler how to describe them to the
runtime.
-Steve
ModuleInfo does actually exist, but it's not documented. I'm not
sure if it's usable for this purpose though. Maybe?
