On 2013-04-03 04:13, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
Yes, though I've had complaints before about a pull being too much code where the unit tests were considered part of the code, and the reviewer thought that number of lines was too great to be worth adding, even if the number of lines of normal code was relatively small. And that sort of attitude would just lead to not properly unit testing stuff. And while we do some great unit testing (the built in unit test feature is a _huge_ success in that regard), there are at least some areas where we really need to step up our game on that (with ranges in particular given all of the variations of them there are and how many static if branches many range-based functions have).
The problem is having the unit tests in the same file. Yes, I know, most of you love it, I don't.
-- /Jacob Carlborg
