Sorry for necrobumping, just wanted to note that [best
practices](https://nim-lang.github.io/Nim/contributing.html#best-practices)
paragraph from contributing guide recommends **assert** for runnableExamples
currently:
> An exception to the above rule is runnableExamples and code-block rst blocks
> intended to be used as runnableExamples, which for brevity use assert instead
> of doAssert. Note that nim doc -d:danger main won't pass -d:danger to the
> runnableExamples, but nim doc --doccmd:-d:danger main would, and so would the
> second example below:
runnableExamples:
doAssert foo() # bad
assert foo() # preferred
Run
Personally, I'm of two minds about runnableExamples. Lower barrier for
contributing testing, even interspersed with documentations is better than no
tests at all. However, most of @arnetheduck's concerns are valid and I agree
with @gemath:
> Some testing code is good example code, but not all of it, and vice versa.
For example, threading code is often not completely deterministic, so you jump
through hoops to concoct tests based on assertions. Example code, on the other
hand, should demonstrate idiomatic style and be plain and ordinary.
