Hm... I think this can be fixed with a library change. I'll look into it tonight.
Sent from my iPhone On Jul 13, 2010, at 8:24 AM, Andrei Alexandrescu <[email protected]> wrote: > There are other problems with the current approach, which make it a net > pessimization: > > 1. assert() has different semantics at top level (straight inside the > unittest) vs. everywhere else (e.g. in functions called by the unittest). > That sucks. > > 2. assert() does not abort the current unittest. It continues soldering on, > even though code insite a given unittest commonly assumes that continued > execution implies success of the previous asserts. > > I protested when Walter introduced this disastrous semantics. He said, "let's > let it be for a while and see how it fares." Now "a while" has passed. The > feature fared badly. It is worse than before. > > By this I kindly ask that either things are improved by fixing both 1 and 2 > above, or the old semantics are enacted. > > Walter, I understand you don't routinely test Phobos. Please also understand > that I test Phobos all the time. You are making my and others' life difficult > for no good reason. > > > Andrei > > On 07/13/2010 10:13 AM, Steve Schveighoffer wrote: >> isn't this just a bug? I don't think the original unit test mode (where any >> assert ends the whole program, with no stack trace) is a step forward. >> >> Can't we just fix the bugs? >> >> -Steve >> >> >> >> >> ----- Original Message ---- >>> From: Andrei Alexandrescu<[email protected]> >>> To: Discuss the phobos library for D<[email protected]> >>> Sent: Tue, July 13, 2010 10:57:24 AM >>> Subject: Re: [phobos] Silent failure of std.container unittests >>> >>> Walter, Sean - I'm asking again, please bring unittests back where they >>> were. The recent change to assert() semantics has cause a net >>> pessimization of everyone's efficiency. >>> >>> Thanks, >>> >>> Andrei >>> >>> On 07/13/2010 07:09 AM, Lars Tandle Kyllingstad wrote: >>>> I'm using Linux too, and DMD 2.047. I've investigated this some more. >>>> Compilation of the std.container unittests succeeds, but the executable >>>> generated/posix/debug/unittest/std/container terminates with exit status >>>> 1. Its main() function never runs. >>>> >>>> -Lars >>>> >>>> >>>> On Mon, 2010-07-12 at 09:18 -0500, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote: >>>>> Can't reproduce on Linux. >>>>> >>>>> Andrei >>>>> >>>>> On 07/12/2010 08:55 AM, Lars Tandle Kyllingstad wrote: >>>>>> When running 'make unittest' on the latest revision of Phobos, it just >>>>>> fails on/after std.container, without any sensible error message: >>>>>> >>>>>> Testing generated/posix/debug/unittest/std/container >>>>>> make[1]: *** [generated/posix/debug/unittest/std/container] Error 1 >>>>>> make: *** [unittest] Error 2 >>>>>> >>>>>> Anyone else seeing this? >>>>>> >>>>>> -Lars >>>>>> >>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>> phobos mailing list >>>>>> [email protected] >>>>>> http://lists.puremagic.com/mailman/listinfo/phobos >>>> >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> phobos mailing list >>>> [email protected] >>>> http://lists.puremagic.com/mailman/listinfo/phobos >>> _______________________________________________ >>> phobos mailing list >>> [email protected] >>> http://lists.puremagic.com/mailman/listinfo/phobos >>> >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> phobos mailing list >> [email protected] >> http://lists.puremagic.com/mailman/listinfo/phobos > _______________________________________________ > phobos mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.puremagic.com/mailman/listinfo/phobos _______________________________________________ phobos mailing list [email protected] http://lists.puremagic.com/mailman/listinfo/phobos
