www.digitalmars.com         C & C++   DMDScript  

digitalmars.D.learn - safe pure unittest

reply simendsjo <simendsjo gmail.com> writes:
This is the first time I've seen attributes on unittests:
https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/phobos/pull/2349/files#diff-ba05e420ac1da65db044e79304d641b6R179

Has this always been supported? I guess it's good practice to add these
on unittests too, but does people even know about this feature? And are
there any cons to doing this?
Aug 13 2014
parent reply "Dicebot" <public dicebot.lv> writes:
On Wednesday, 13 August 2014 at 12:26:02 UTC, simendsjo wrote:

 This is the first time I've seen attributes on unittests:
 https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/phobos/pull/2349/files#diff-ba05e420ac1da65db044e79304d641b6R179

 Has this always been supported? I guess it's good practice to 
 add these
 on unittests too, but does people even know about this feature? 
 And are
 there any cons to doing this?


unittest block is effectively just a special function declaration 
so all function attributes are applicable and act in a similar 
way.

It is an extremely important idiom when you wan't to ensure 
specific properties of templated function that may be valid or 
not depending on template arguments. For example, function with 
output range may be  nogc or not depending if used output range 
type triggers GC. But you can mark with  nogc unittest that uses 
it with dummy output range to ensure that _nothing else_ 
allocated.
Aug 13 2014
parent reply simendsjo <simendsjo gmail.com> writes:
On 08/13/2014 02:50 PM, Dicebot wrote:

 On Wednesday, 13 August 2014 at 12:26:02 UTC, simendsjo wrote:

 This is the first time I've seen attributes on unittests:
 https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/phobos/pull/2349/files#diff-ba05e420ac1da65db044e79304d641b6R179


 Has this always been supported? I guess it's good practice to add these
 on unittests too, but does people even know about this feature? And are
 there any cons to doing this?


 
 unittest block is effectively just a special function declaration so all
 function attributes are applicable and act in a similar way.
 
 It is an extremely important idiom when you wan't to ensure specific
 properties of templated function that may be valid or not depending on
 template arguments. For example, function with output range may be  nogc
 or not depending if used output range type triggers GC. But you can mark
 with  nogc unittest that uses it with dummy output range to ensure that
 _nothing else_ allocated.


Thanks.

The unittest documentation notes that unittests are functions in one of
the sentences, but nothing regarding attributes (except for private) is
mentioned: http://dlang.org/unittest.html
Aug 13 2014
next sibling parent "H. S. Teoh via Digitalmars-d-learn" <digitalmars-d-learn puremagic.com> writes:
On Wed, Aug 13, 2014 at 03:03:14PM +0200, simendsjo via Digitalmars-d-learn
wrote:

 On 08/13/2014 02:50 PM, Dicebot wrote:

 On Wednesday, 13 August 2014 at 12:26:02 UTC, simendsjo wrote:

 This is the first time I've seen attributes on unittests:
 https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/phobos/pull/2349/files#diff-ba05e420ac1da65db044e79304d641b6R179


 Has this always been supported? I guess it's good practice to add
 these on unittests too, but does people even know about this
 feature? And are there any cons to doing this?


 
 unittest block is effectively just a special function declaration so
 all function attributes are applicable and act in a similar way.
 
 It is an extremely important idiom when you wan't to ensure specific
 properties of templated function that may be valid or not depending
 on template arguments. For example, function with output range may
 be  nogc or not depending if used output range type triggers GC. But
 you can mark with  nogc unittest that uses it with dummy output
 range to ensure that _nothing else_ allocated.


 
 Thanks.
 
 The unittest documentation notes that unittests are functions in one
 of the sentences, but nothing regarding attributes (except for
 private) is mentioned: http://dlang.org/unittest.html


A PR to fix this would be greatly welcomed. ;-)


T

-- 
Why do conspiracy theories always come from the same people??
Aug 13 2014
prev sibling parent "H. S. Teoh via Digitalmars-d-learn" <digitalmars-d-learn puremagic.com> writes:
On Wed, Aug 13, 2014 at 07:53:34AM -0700, H. S. Teoh via Digitalmars-d-learn
wrote:

 On Wed, Aug 13, 2014 at 03:03:14PM +0200, simendsjo via Digitalmars-d-learn
wrote:

 On 08/13/2014 02:50 PM, Dicebot wrote:

 On Wednesday, 13 August 2014 at 12:26:02 UTC, simendsjo wrote:

 This is the first time I've seen attributes on unittests:
 https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/phobos/pull/2349/files#diff-ba05e420ac1da65db044e79304d641b6R179


 Has this always been supported? I guess it's good practice to add
 these on unittests too, but does people even know about this
 feature? And are there any cons to doing this?


 
 unittest block is effectively just a special function declaration
 so all function attributes are applicable and act in a similar
 way.
 
 It is an extremely important idiom when you wan't to ensure
 specific properties of templated function that may be valid or not
 depending on template arguments. For example, function with output
 range may be  nogc or not depending if used output range type
 triggers GC. But you can mark with  nogc unittest that uses it
 with dummy output range to ensure that _nothing else_ allocated.


 
 Thanks.
 
 The unittest documentation notes that unittests are functions in one
 of the sentences, but nothing regarding attributes (except for
 private) is mentioned: http://dlang.org/unittest.html


 
 A PR to fix this would be greatly welcomed. ;-)


[...]

Ninja'd: https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/dlang.org/pull/685

;-)


T

-- 
Stop staring at me like that! It's offens... no, you'll hurt your eyes!
Oct 30 2014