On Mon, 10 Mar 2025 at 20:36, Richard (Rikki) Andrew Cattermole via Digitalmars-d <digitalmars-d@puremagic.com> wrote:

On 10/03/2025 11:11 PM, Manu wrote:
> Has anyone poked at this? Are there known inhibitors?

A lot of the tests have switches applied to them.

Yup, I saw that. They need to be batched by switch group I guess...

They are not as simple as it initially appears.

Also each test may have a main function.

Obviously that design doesn't scale.

Maybe put a compiler hack which takes multiple main() functions from separate modules and queues them to run sequentially... that's probably easier than re-engineering thousands of test files?

I'm sure there are some low hanging fruit, and a new test runner may be
able to take advantage of that. But I suspect that this isn't an easy task.

This appears to be a whole new test runner already? It doesn't look familiar at all to me since last time I was pushing to DMD. (like ~2020?)

But yeah, nar, it clearly needs some work. I reckon it's literally a maximum priority issue; I can say that I'm not motivated to commit to DMD like this. 'ain't no one got time for that! Am I the only one, or is it repellant to other potential contributors?

I mean, like, you can't meaningfully focus on the work you're doing, because you make a tweak and then twiddle your thumbs for way too long to find out if you made a mistake... I've long since moved on to doing something else in that timeframe.

Like, Nick asked me to add back-ticks to a comment... an hour later, he's long gone off and doing something else... as you would expect!

We could build and run Overwatch tests in a quarter of the time (an enormous project!), and I thought that was bad then! :P ... maybe DLF have resources to direct at this, and/or I wonder if it's an obvious GSOC project?

If it were my project, I would treat any resources directed to this as an investment.