On Tuesday, 30 June 2015 at 19:48:46 UTC, Jacob Carlborg wrote:
On 30/06/15 10:06, Atila Neves wrote:
Well, the dream would be that `assert(foo ==
bar)` did what part of this PR does, but that's another story
and
something that can't be done by a library unless we had AST
macros,
which we won't. Or Lisp's reader macros, but we won't get
those either.
I was thinking the same. Both the test!"==" and shouldEqual are
workarounds to get a nice message on an assertion failure. I'm
wondering how hard it would be to have the compiler generate a
string representing the failing expression.
Well, there's a PR for improving assertions here:
https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/dmd/pull/1426
Since I have 0 experience in compilers in general and dmd in
particular, I thought that'd be an easy way for me to get an in
on the assert situation. It seems... more complicated than I can
handle at the moment.
The 100% ideal situation is for assert to do what I'm doing with
the functions in the `should` module. That module really
shouldn't even exist.
Atila
