On Saturday, 3 September 2016 at 15:58:51 UTC, Jonathan M Davis
wrote:
On Saturday, September 03, 2016 07:48:14 H. S. Teoh via
Digitalmars-d wrote:
> In any case, for now, I never put non-generic unit tests in
> templates, and I reject PRs that have them. Sure, having to
> copy-paste your examples sucks, but it doesn't affect the
> code of everyone who uses the template, whereas ddoc-ed unit
> tests do.
[...]
Actually you don't need to copy-paste your examples, which IMO
is a bad idea to begin with. Just version out the non-generic
unittests when compiling user code, and you can have the best
of both worlds.
And you still have the problem that all of those unit tests
will be compiled into every instantiation of the template
that's part of your unittest build. So, you end up with longer
build times and longer run times for your unit tests. I agree
that copy-pasting sucks, but it's what we had to do before with
had ddoc-ed unit tests, and I still think that it's better than
resulting in all of the additional copies of the tests being
compiled in and run - especially if the project isn't small.
- Jonathan M Davis
No need for that - see my other post:
http://forum.dlang.org/post/psrgjdlvsiukkuhre...@forum.dlang.org
