www.digitalmars.com         C & C++   DMDScript  

digitalmars.D - std/package.d - better unittests

reply Anonymous <email example.org> writes:
Looking through the std/package.d unittests, it seems too prone 
to mistakes. There is currently nothing in place to make sure 
that `import std` actually does import all of the modules in the 
standard library.

I threw together a quick unittest that checks to make sure that 
all standard library modules are imported by std/package.d: 
(diff) https://pastebin.com/v1EnyZ53 (warning: very 
hacked-together)

I ran it, and got these results:

std.typetuple is not imported in std.package.
std.xml is not imported in std.package.
std.outbuffer is not imported in std.package.

Is there a reason that these are not imported, or is it just 
accidental?

I think there should be an additional unittest added to 
std.package that checks like this to prevent mistakes when new 
modules are added to phobos.


Thoughts?
Apr 29
parent Seb <seb wilzba.ch> writes:
On Monday, 29 April 2019 at 22:41:31 UTC, Anonymous wrote:
 I ran it, and got these results:

 std.typetuple is not imported in std.package.
 std.xml is not imported in std.package.
 std.outbuffer is not imported in std.package.

 Is there a reason that these are not imported, or is it just 
 accidental?
Yes, there's a reason. All three are deprecated modules. std.typetuple is also not even documented anymore. You would never want to use any of these modules in your UFCS pipes.
 I think there should be an additional unittest added to 
 std.package that checks like this to prevent mistakes when new 
 modules are added to phobos.
It's a simple file. Modules in Phobos get added/changed _less_ than once a year, so imho it's not worth the cost of writing and maintaining this test file which is bigger than the file itself.
Apr 29