• Sergei Nosov (8/8) Mar 16 2014 Hi!
• safety0ff (14/18) Mar 16 2014 Here's the first thing that came to mind:
• Sergei Nosov (4/23) Mar 16 2014 Thx! That's better, but I think -main switch could be made to
• Andrej Mitrovic (3/6) Mar 16 2014 It can't work, because main could be stored in a pre-built object or
• Rikki Cattermole (6/9) Mar 16 2014 Hmm I really should consider making a DIP for a deferred CTFE
• Dicebot (4/13) Mar 16 2014 Linker will still complain about duplicate symbols. This issue
• Rikki Cattermole (3/19) Mar 16 2014 I was inferring that no stub _Dmain would be added. Since it

"Sergei Nosov" <sergei.nosov gmail.com> writes:

Hi!

Suppose I have a small .d script that has a main. Is there any 
simple way to just run the unit tests without running main at all?

I thought -main switch was intended for this, but apparently it 
works only if there's no main defined at all, otherwise, it 
issues a double main definition error.

I could place main into a separate module but its really awkward 
to create 2 files for a small script.

"safety0ff" <safety0ff.dev gmail.com> writes:

On Sunday, 16 March 2014 at 07:59:33 UTC, Sergei Nosov wrote:
 Hi!

 Suppose I have a small .d script that has a main. Is there any 
 simple way to just run the unit tests without running main at 
 all?

Here's the first thing that came to mind:
If you never want to both unit tests and regular main:
---- code begins ----
import std.stdio;
version(unittest) void main(){}
else
void main() { writeln("Hello world!"); }

unittest { writeln("Hello unit testing world!"); }
---- code ends ----

If you sometimes want to have your normal main with unit testing 
you can replace "version(unittest)" with "version(nopmain)" or 
some other custom version identifier and compile with 
-version=nopmain when you want the dummy main.

"Sergei Nosov" <sergei.nosov gmail.com> writes:

On Sunday, 16 March 2014 at 08:22:04 UTC, safety0ff wrote:
 On Sunday, 16 March 2014 at 07:59:33 UTC, Sergei Nosov wrote:
 Hi!

 Suppose I have a small .d script that has a main. Is there any 
 simple way to just run the unit tests without running main at 
 all?

 Here's the first thing that came to mind:
 If you never want to both unit tests and regular main:
 ---- code begins ----
 import std.stdio;
 version(unittest) void main(){}
 else
 void main() { writeln("Hello world!"); }

 unittest { writeln("Hello unit testing world!"); }
 ---- code ends ----

 If you sometimes want to have your normal main with unit 
 testing you can replace "version(unittest)" with 
 "version(nopmain)" or some other custom version identifier and 
 compile with -version=nopmain when you want the dummy main.

Thx! That's better, but I think -main switch could be made to 
work like 'add or replace main by stub' instead of just 'add'. I 
don't think it'll hurt anybody, what do you think?

Andrej Mitrovic <andrej.mitrovich gmail.com> writes:

On 3/16/14, Sergei Nosov <sergei.nosov gmail.com> wrote:
 Thx! That's better, but I think -main switch could be made to
 work like 'add or replace main by stub' instead of just 'add'. I
 don't think it'll hurt anybody, what do you think?

It can't work, because main could be stored in a pre-built object or
static library that's passed to DMD.

"Rikki Cattermole" <alphaglosined gmail.com> writes:

On Sunday, 16 March 2014 at 10:15:00 UTC, Andrej Mitrovic wrote:
 It can't work, because main could be stored in a pre-built 
 object or
 static library that's passed to DMD.

Hmm I really should consider making a DIP for a deferred CTFE 
block. Could really come in handy for a situation like this. In 
the format of if -main specified use e.g. -version=D_Main to 
remove the call to _Dmain symbol. Removes the whole linker issue 
altogether.

"Dicebot" <public dicebot.lv> writes:

On Sunday, 16 March 2014 at 12:57:04 UTC, Rikki Cattermole wrote:
 On Sunday, 16 March 2014 at 10:15:00 UTC, Andrej Mitrovic wrote:
 It can't work, because main could be stored in a pre-built 
 object or
 static library that's passed to DMD.

 Hmm I really should consider making a DIP for a deferred CTFE 
 block. Could really come in handy for a situation like this. In 
 the format of if -main specified use e.g. -version=D_Main to 
 remove the call to _Dmain symbol. Removes the whole linker 
 issue altogether.

Linker will still complain about duplicate symbols. This issue 
can't be solved within existing C-compatible object file 
toolchain.

"Rikki Cattermole" <alphaglosined gmail.com> writes:

On Sunday, 16 March 2014 at 20:22:15 UTC, Dicebot wrote:
 On Sunday, 16 March 2014 at 12:57:04 UTC, Rikki Cattermole 
 wrote:
 On Sunday, 16 March 2014 at 10:15:00 UTC, Andrej Mitrovic 
 wrote:
 It can't work, because main could be stored in a pre-built 
 object or
 static library that's passed to DMD.

 Hmm I really should consider making a DIP for a deferred CTFE 
 block. Could really come in handy for a situation like this. 
 In the format of if -main specified use e.g. -version=D_Main 
 to remove the call to _Dmain symbol. Removes the whole linker 
 issue altogether.

 Linker will still complain about duplicate symbols. This issue 
 can't be solved within existing C-compatible object file 
 toolchain.

I was inferring that no stub _Dmain would be added. Since it 
would no longer be called.