| Thread overview | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
June 05, 2013 Handling unittests that are designed to fail | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| ||||
Hi all,
I'd like to design a unittest that will fail -- that is, it will trigger an
assert() or enforce() failure inside the function it is testing.
How would I go about doing this so that the unittest {} block will confirm the failure and count this as a "pass"?
Thanks & best wishes,
-- Joe
| ||||
June 05, 2013 Re: Handling unittests that are designed to fail | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| ||||
Posted in reply to Joseph Rushton Wakeling | Am Wed, 05 Jun 2013 14:31:58 +0200 schrieb Joseph Rushton Wakeling <joseph.wakeling@webdrake.net>: > Hi all, > > I'd like to design a unittest that will fail -- that is, it will > trigger an assert() or enforce() failure inside the function it is > testing. > > How would I go about doing this so that the unittest {} block will confirm the failure and count this as a "pass"? > > Thanks & best wishes, > > -- Joe http://dlang.org/phobos/std_exception.html assertThrown and maybe collectException | |||
June 05, 2013 Re: Handling unittests that are designed to fail | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| ||||
Posted in reply to Joseph Rushton Wakeling | Joseph Rushton Wakeling: > I'd like to design a unittest that will fail -- that is, it will trigger an > assert() or enforce() failure inside the function it is testing. > > How would I go about doing this so that the unittest {} block will confirm the > failure and count this as a "pass"? For the exceptions take a look here: http://dlang.org/phobos/std_exception.html#.assertThrown Bye, bearophile | |||
June 05, 2013 Re: Handling unittests that are designed to fail | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| ||||
Posted in reply to bearophile | Thanks to both of you :-) In the end I decided to go with collectExceptionMsg as this allows a very precise unittest. | |||
Copyright © 1999-2021 by the D Language Foundation
Permalink
Reply