On Monday, 27 April 2015 at 11:30:04 UTC, Steven Schveighoffer
wrote:
On 4/27/15 6:20 AM, Dicebot wrote:
On Monday, 27 April 2015 at 10:15:20 UTC, Kagamin wrote:
On Monday, 27 April 2015 at 09:22:48 UTC, Dicebot wrote:
Compiling tests of dependencies pretty much never causes any
notable
slowdown.
This thread doesn't support that view, see the first post.
Which part exactly? I only see comparisons for compiling AND
running
tests for dependencies. And it is usually running which causes
the
slowdown.
The problem is as follows:
1. Unit tests for some library are written for that library.
They are written to run tests during unit tests of that library
only (possibly with certain requirements of environment,
including build lines, or expectations of system resource
availability).
2. People who import that library's modules are not trying to
test the library, they are trying to test their code.
Those are two points I fundamentally disagree with. It doesn't
matter where the code comes from - in the end only thing that
matters is correctness of your application as a whole. And
considering tests are not necessarily pure the results may very
well differ between running those tests spearately and as part of
application test suite a whole. Unless compiling some specific
tests causes some proven _compilation_ slowdown (I have yet to
see that) those all must be compiled and filtered by runtime test
runner optionally.
And if tests are written in a weird way that they can only be ran
within that library test step, those are not really unittests.
Usage of version(MyLibTests) in Nick SDL library annoyed me so
much that I forked it to never deal with those pesky versions
again. Don't want to do that with Phobos too.
