bearophile wrote: > Jens Mueller: > > > I agree with bearophile. Unit testing can be implemented on top of the > > language and shouldn't be put into it. > > This is not what I have said. I was talking about option IV I have explained > here: > http://www.digitalmars.com/webnews/newsgroups.php?art_group=digitalmars.D&article_id=107997 > > This means I accept the built-in unit test system, but I think it's wrong to > make it do everything you want from an unit test system. So the built-in one > has to give the basic features (like giving a name to each unit test) that > are later used by the library-defined unit test system.
I mean the same. "I like the basic built-in support for unit testing in D but more advanced testing should be implemented in a module ideally leading to something like GoogleTest for D." Advanced features should be implemented on top of the built-in one. Specifically they should not be put into the core language. Sorry for my bad wording. Jens
