Re: [Boost-users] [boost.test] 0 return code with expected failures?

On 4/15/2010 6:53 PM, Gennadiy Rozental wrote:

Ahmed Badran writes:

...

Ahhhh, finally found the difference, example 8 works as I would expect. Turns out that my test case had a BOOST_REQUIRE rather than a BOOST_CHECK (like example 8), so it turns out that a test case that has a BOOST_REQUIRE and is flagged as a known issues still causes a non-zero exit status which is not what I would expect since the test was flagged as a known issue anyway. Is that the intended behavior? Or would you consider revising this behavior in a future release? I appreciate your help.

You can't "expect" fatal errors. The easiest way to deal with this is to store the result in boolean variable and use BOOST_CHECK in it. The rest of the test can be conditioned on the variable name.

I guess you're right, the test really wasn't expecting fatal errors, it was more along the lines of require this precondition (the boost require check) before running the actual test within a single unit test. Then again these tests are now considered acceptable failures, but I do not want to disable them for history and tracking purposes. -Ahmed