e compiled with that switch, of course).
Man, I'm very pleased to read someone else advocating for optionally
verbose assertions.
This could use 2 arguments instead of a predicate:
assert(expressions, value);
Example use:
[snip]
I don't think we can change assert syntax now. Wh
On 04/14/2011 06:52 PM, Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
A compromise might be to be able to name unit tests, and then run a specific
unit test by name on execution only. This allows you to ensure a specific unit
test (and specific asserts in that unit test) are running without having to see
all the
, I'm very pleased to read someone else advocating for optionally
verbose assertions.
This could use 2 arguments instead of a predicate:
assert(expressions, value);
Example use:
[snip]
I don't think we can change assert syntax now. What I was looking was
for something more like:
ass
advocating for optionally verbose
assertions.
This could use 2 arguments instead of a predicate:
assert(expressions, value);
Example use:
[snip]
I don't think we can change assert syntax now. What I was looking was for
something more like:
assert(x == y);
prints out
"asserting x == y: tru
version statements or templates).
>>>> It would
>>>> be nice if there was a -assertprint mode which showed asserts
>>>> actually running
>>>> (only for the module compiled with that switch, of course).
>>>
>>> Man, I'm very p
ments or templates).
> >>>> It would
> >>>> be nice if there was a -assertprint mode which showed asserts
> >>>> actually running
> >>>> (only for the module compiled with that switch, of course).
> >>>
> >>> Man, I&#
of course).
Man, I'm very pleased to read someone else advocating for optionally
verbose assertions.
This could use 2 arguments instead of a predicate:
assert(expressions, value);
Example use:
[snip]
I don't think we can change assert syntax now. What I was looking was
for something
ly running
>>> (only for the module compiled with that switch, of course).
>>
>> Man, I'm very pleased to read someone else advocating for optionally
>> verbose assertions.
>> This could use 2 arguments instead of a predicate:
>> assert(expressions,
n I'm doing version statements or templates). It
would
be nice if there was a -assertprint mode which showed asserts actually
running
(only for the module compiled with that switch, of course).
Man, I'm very pleased to read someone else advocating for optionally
verbose assertions.
t would
be nice if there was a -assertprint mode which showed asserts actually running
(only for the module compiled with that switch, of course).
Man, I'm very pleased to read someone else advocating for optionally verbose
assertions.
This could use 2 arguments instead of a predicate:
ass
10 matches
Mail list logo
