On 10/30/19 1:11 PM, Iurii Zaikin wrote: >> Why can't unit tests live with the code they're testing? They're already >> logically tied together; what's the harm there? This needn't be the case >> for ALL tests, etc. The test driver could still live externally. The >> test in the other .c would just have exported functions... ? >> > Curiously enough, this approach has been adopted by D 2.0 where unittests are > members of the class under test: https://digitalmars.com/d/2.0/unittest.html > but such approach is not mainstream. > I personally like the idea of testing the lowest level bits in isolation even if > they are not a part of any interface. I think that specifying the > interface using > unit tests and ensuring implementation correctness are complementary but fwiw this is my preferred approach as well > I haven't had much luck arguing this with our esteemed colleagues. > surprise, surprise /s
