• mfeathers (3/3) Jan 10 2007 I was looking at the spec and it mentions that "unittest" is a special
• Alexander Panek (8/14) Jan 10 2007 Unittests are actually not methods inside classes, but more statement
• mfeathers (10/27) Jan 10 2007 Thanks. Another quick question. Is "assert" legal syntax outside of
• Lars Ivar Igesund (7/18) Jan 10 2007 assert(0 == 1);, but otherwise yes.
• Ary Manzana (4/15) Jan 10 2007 Yes. Asserts are always evaluated if you provided -debug to the
• BCS (3/18) Jan 10 2007 asserts are active unless you give the -release flag, even without the -...

mfeathers <mfeathers objectmentor.com> writes:

I was looking at the spec and it mentions that "unittest" is a special 
method in classes.

Can you have more than one unittest method in a class?

Alexander Panek <a.panek brainsware.org> writes:

mfeathers wrote:
 
 I was looking at the spec and it mentions that "unittest" is a special 
 method in classes.
 
 Can you have more than one unittest method in a class?
 

Unittests are actually not methods inside classes, but more statement 
blocks that are executed when you compile & execute unittests. So, they 
work as if you provide a void main () {}  in every file/class/whatever 
scope you put them in.

And yes, IIRC, you can have multiple unittest blocks per file, too. 
Though, they are all executed then. You could workaround that with 
version() { } blocks.

mfeathers <mfeathers objectmentor.com> writes:

Thanks.  Another quick question.  Is "assert" legal syntax outside of 
contacts and unit tests?  For instance, can I do this:

unittest {
     someMethod();
}

void someMethod() {
     assert 0 == 1
}

Michael Feathers

Alexander Panek wrote:
 mfeathers wrote:
 
 I was looking at the spec and it mentions that "unittest" is a special 
 method in classes.

 Can you have more than one unittest method in a class?

 
 Unittests are actually not methods inside classes, but more statement 
 blocks that are executed when you compile & execute unittests. So, they 
 work as if you provide a void main () {}  in every file/class/whatever 
 scope you put them in.
 
 And yes, IIRC, you can have multiple unittest blocks per file, too. 
 Though, they are all executed then. You could workaround that with 
 version() { } blocks.

Lars Ivar Igesund <larsivar igesund.net> writes:

mfeathers wrote:

 
 Thanks.  Another quick question.  Is "assert" legal syntax outside of
 contacts and unit tests?  For instance, can I do this:
 
 unittest {
      someMethod();
 }
 
 void someMethod() {
      assert 0 == 1
 }

assert(0 == 1);, but otherwise yes.

-- 
Lars Ivar Igesund
blog at http://larsivi.net
DSource & #D: larsivi
Dancing the Tango

Ary Manzana <ary esperanto.org.ar> writes:

mfeathers escribió:
 
 Thanks.  Another quick question.  Is "assert" legal syntax outside of 
 contacts and unit tests?  For instance, can I do this:
 
 unittest {
     someMethod();
 }
 
 void someMethod() {
     assert 0 == 1
 }

Yes. Asserts are always evaluated if you provided -debug to the 
compiler. Of course for asserts in unittests to work you also have to 
provider -unittest to the compiler.

BCS <ao pathlink.com> writes:

Reply to Ary,

 mfeathers escribió:
 
 Thanks.  Another quick question.  Is "assert" legal syntax outside of
 contacts and unit tests?  For instance, can I do this:
 
 unittest {
 someMethod();
 }
 void someMethod() {
 assert 0 == 1
 }

 Yes. Asserts are always evaluated if you provided -debug to the
 compiler. Of course for asserts in unittests to work you also have to
 provider -unittest to the compiler.
 

asserts are active unless you give the -release flag, even without the -debug 
flag