On 3/31/15 9:05 AM, w0rp wrote:
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.
ModuleInfo does actually exist, but it's not documented. I'm not sure if
it's usable for this purpose though. Maybe?
No, I mean this: https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/dmd/pull/2271
Essentially, you have user-defined generation of runtime info stored
inside the ModuleInfo. When this is working, we can do whatever we want
for unit tests via attributes.
-Steve
