On Saturday, 17 September 2016 at 17:22:52 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
The unittest documentation is nicely generated. The unittest code itself is only generated for one instantiation.

I had a similar thought, but I didn't really like verbosity of the static if.

I think at some point someone suggested we could implement explicit support for such unittests via `static unittest`:

/** Awesome struct */
struct Awesome(T)
    /** Awesome function. */
    void awesome() {}

    static unittest
        Awesome!int awesome;

A static unittest would not have implicit access to anything internal in the aggregation (this is different to your solution where the unittest has access to all fields of the Awesome!int instance).

Note the difference inside the unittest: it uses `Awesome!int awesome` instead of the previous `Awesome awesome`. In your case it implicitly refers to the Awesome!int instantiation, however you're actually presenting uncompilable code to the user! The user might copy-paste it into a main function but it would fail to build.

So the feature might have some merit as it would avoid generating docs with code which may not even work.

Reply via email to