www.digitalmars.com         C & C++   DMDScript  

digitalmars.D.bugs - [Issue 11636] New: -unittest flag preserves assert() statements but still allows in/out contracts to be stripped

reply d-bugmail puremagic.com writes:
https://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=11636

           Summary: -unittest flag preserves assert() statements but still
                    allows in/out contracts to be stripped
           Product: D
           Version: D2
          Platform: All
        OS/Version: All
            Status: NEW
          Severity: normal
          Priority: P2
         Component: DMD
        AssignedTo: nobody puremagic.com
        ReportedBy: joseph.wakeling webdrake.net



2013-11-28 14:51:13 PST ---
Created an attachment (id=1296)
Code to illustrate the bug: try running with -unittest, -release, and -unittest
-release flags

Adding the -unittest flag to a build means that any assert() statements in the
code will be preserved, even if the -release flag is also used.

However, -release will still strip out in/out contracts even if the -unittest
flag is used.  This can lead to unittest failures when e.g. the unittest checks
that an in-contract is respected by looking for an AssertError.

The attached code illustrates this: if run with

    rdmd -unittest contract.d

it runs without error, as the call to foo in main does not fail the in-contract
assert, and the unittest catches the AssertError.

Similarly, if run with

    rdmd -release contract.d

it also runs without error, as the unittests are not called and the in-contract
is stripped out, meaning foo will run even with incorrect input.

However, when run with

    rdmd -unittest -release contract.d

it will fail with an error:

    core.exception.AssertError contract.d(27): assertThrown failed: No
AssertError was thrown.

which triggers because, while asserts are still active, the in-contract has
still been stripped, and hence the assert it contains is not called, and an
AssertError is not thrown.

This inconsistency should surely be fixed -- if -unittest requires assert
statements to be present, it should require _all_ assert statements be present,
including those in in- and out-contracts.

-- 
Configure issuemail: https://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
Nov 28 2013
parent d-bugmail puremagic.com writes:
https://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=11636




2013-11-28 15:02:56 PST ---


 This inconsistency should surely be fixed -- if -unittest requires assert
 statements to be present, it should require _all_ assert statements be present,
 including those in in- and out-contracts.


Alternatively, if the point of view is that -unittest -release should
effectively test code "as it is with the -release flag active" (i.e. so
contracts _should_ be stripped), there needs to be some way of checking if
-release has been used, and conditionally selecting different unittests
accordingly, e.g.:

    version(release) assert(/* something appropriate to -release mode */);
    else assert(/* something else */);

... but code being tested "as it is with the -release flag active" doesn't seem
to me to sit well with keeping in-body assert() statements active.

-- 
Configure issuemail: https://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
Nov 28 2013