On 2011-12-22 17:59, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
On 12/22/11 6:50 AM, Jacob Carlborg wrote:
You should treat your testing code just as you treat your "regular"
code. Just as well designed, just as modularized, just as effective,
just as clean. The testing code is in fact just as much part of the
"regular" code as the rest of the code.
This. YES. A liability of the current std.datetime is that it assumes
that unittest code is exempt from the rules that apply to regular code.
I am increasingly worried about that module. It has been argued that its
sheer size is not a problem, but somehow the task of accounting for that
has taken a life of its own - e.g. we can't test std.datetime like
everything else in Phobos, it needs its own version.
Andrei
That doesn't sound right. If std.datetime can't be tested like the rest
of Phobos there's something quite seriously wrong with it.
--
/Jacob Carlborg
