On Friday, 27 September 2013 at 06:28:54 UTC, Jacob Carlborg wrote:
> On 2013-09-26 22:39, Gary Willoughby wrote:
>
>> I knowm, it's weird, i've been trying to find out why it's private,
>> everything looks like it's public. Try running the code i posted see if
>> you can get it to work.
>
> It works fine using DMD 2.063.2 on Mac OS X.

I've just tested it on Mac OS 10.8 and it fails.

Are you sure you commented out the line of code that you need to test? In the snippet of code above the working deprecated version is uncommented. Comment that line out and try using the property.

On 2013-09-27 18:23, Gary Willoughby wrote:

> I've just tested it on Mac OS 10.8 and it fails.
>
> Are you sure you commented out the line of code that you need to test?
> In the snippet of code above the working deprecated version is
> uncommented. Comment that line out and try using the property.

Hmm, ok, you were right. The following commit made it public:

d5fda766c248b5b3671b1b498c0a7dba8bee7442

I guess we'll have to wait to the next release of DMD or use git HEAD.

-- 
/Jacob Carlborg

Updated DUnit with some refactored code and started to implement a results module.

On Saturday, 21 September 2013 at 00:40:47 UTC, Gary Willoughby wrote:
> DUnit: Advanced unit testing toolkit.
>
> I've needed this for a project i've been working on so i created a toolkit that i'm using and happy with. I must thank the community here for helping me with a few issues along the way (mostly due to poor documentation). It uses a lot of compile time reflection to generate the mocks, which has been very interesting to learn/write (to say the least).

Guys, we have at least 5 (!) different unit test projects!
Can you cooperate your efforts to create one, but wonderful?

On Sunday, 6 October 2013 at 07:32:09 UTC, ilya-stromberg wrote:
> On Saturday, 21 September 2013 at 00:40:47 UTC, Gary Willoughby wrote:
>> DUnit: Advanced unit testing toolkit.
>>
>> I've needed this for a project i've been working on so i created a toolkit that i'm using and happy with. I must thank the community here for helping me with a few issues along the way (mostly due to poor documentation). It uses a lot of compile time reflection to generate the mocks, which has been very interesting to learn/write (to say the least).
>
> Guys, we have at least 5 (!) different unit test projects!
> Can you cooperate your efforts to create one, but wonderful?

I think it's good to have many as we are all approaching the same problem from different angles. I'm sure in the long run one or two will grow to be dominant but in the meantime many will ensure healthy competition on features and completeness.

On Sunday, 6 October 2013 at 10:36:08 UTC, Gary Willoughby wrote:
> On Sunday, 6 October 2013 at 07:32:09 UTC, ilya-stromberg wrote:
>> Guys, we have at least 5 (!) different unit test projects!
>> Can you cooperate your efforts to create one, but wonderful?
>
> I think it's good to have many as we are all approaching the same problem from different angles. I'm sure in the long run one or two will grow to be dominant but in the meantime many will ensure healthy competition on features and completeness.

OK, maybe you are right.
Do you have any plans to integrate your code into Phobos?

On Sunday, 6 October 2013 at 14:24:56 UTC, ilya-stromberg wrote:
> OK, maybe you are right.
> Do you have any plans to integrate your code into Phobos?

Nah, a unit testing framework is not really standard lib material.