On Jul 5, 2010, at 11:35 PM, Walter Bright wrote: > > Sean Kelly wrote: >> That's probably my fault. > > Every team needs one of those people. Thanks for filling that role.
I like to maintain a steady level of failure to keep things positive ;-) How about this... the unittest handler only returns an error code and if it's nonzero then the app won't run. That's consistent with the pre-assert change behavior. The difference being that even if the unittests are successful, to prevent the app from running, a non-zero error should be returned. It's been so long since I originally implemented this (it was done for Gregor when I was working on Tango) that I don't recall the exact use case he presented, but it seems reasonable that if you run an app and it runs some tests but doesn't actually execute then the return value should be nonzero, even if all the tests succeed. What do you think? _______________________________________________ phobos mailing list [email protected] http://lists.puremagic.com/mailman/listinfo/phobos
