1NNN-MKY.md

Statement Unittest

Field	Value
DIP:	(number/id -- assigned by DIP Manager)
Author:	monkyyy, [email protected]
Implementation:	(links to implementation PR if any)
Status:	Draft

Abstract

Shortened unittest syntax

Contents

• Rationale
• Prior Work
• Description
• Breaking Changes and Deprecations
• Reference
• Copyright & License
• History

Rationale

One-liner functions should at least have one line of tests.

Prior Work

Shortened function syntax.

Shortened contract syntax.

Description

A module-level unittest statement( uses () instead of {}) for single asserts , with an optional string message

unittest(1==1);
unittest(1==1,"math broke");

TODO: Detailed technical description of the new semantics. Language grammar changes (per https://dlang.org/spec/grammar.html) needed to support the new syntax (or change) must be listed.

Breaking Changes and Deprecations

On-going debate if it effects future unittest syntax

Reference

https://forum.dlang.org/thread/[email protected]

https://forum.dlang.org/thread/[email protected]

Copyright & License

Copyright (c) 2024 by the D Language Foundation

Licensed under Creative Commons Zero 1.0

History

The DIP Manager will supplement this section with links to forum discsusionss and a summary of the formal assessment.

adr is in favor of unittest=>1==1;

walters suggestion about "argument unittests" being blocked still seems wrong to me and he never responded to my code block about template unittests; I believe that all unittests must be compile time and therefore probably templated

updated for snars comment

unittest => 1 == 1; cannot have an assert message in a way that feels natural. Your unittest(1 == 1, "math broke"); is quite intuitive. ADR is wrong.

unittest => 1 == 1; cannot have an assert message in a way that feels natural. Your unittest(1 == 1, "math broke"); is quite intuitive. ADR is wrong.

I believe adr could trivailly be convinced if someone else wrote the code, if upstream annoies you consider the other option