Re: Named unittests

[Jacob Carlborg via Digitalmars-d]

On 2015-03-31 16:55, Meta wrote:

Aren't unittest blocks just special functions? If that's the case, there
should be no problem being able to give them names. It seems to me that
it would entail the lifting of a restriction rather than a real language
change.
Before:
unittest
{
     assert(1 == 1);
}

After:
unittest checkBasicLaw
{
     assert(1 == 1);
}

I prefer a UDA accepting a string, this can contain spaces and it's not 
limited to identifier names.

--
/Jacob Carlborg