I'd like to strongly add my vote for these too. They are a continuing nuisance, of which I have recent and relevant experience testing the statistical distributions - plug ;-). I'd also like to see additional macros provided to exactly duplicate BOOST_CHECK_CLOSE (and warn and require of course) but with names BOOST_CHECK_CLOSE_PERCENT ... to reduce continuing confusion with percent and fractions. Thanks Paul PS Boost.Test remains an extremely valuable test tool - I vow never to start coding again without using it as I go along! | -----Original Message----- | From: boost-bounces@lists.boost.org | [mailto:boost-bounces@lists.boost.org] On Behalf Of Gennadiy Rozental | Sent: 08 November 2006 18:48 | To: boost@lists.boost.org | Subject: Re: [boost] Boost.Test feature request | | | "John Maddock" <john@johnmaddock.co.uk> wrote in message | news:000701c70357$ae886180$c9541b56@fuji... | >I have a couple of annoying issues with Boost.Test's output | on failed tests: | > 2) If the type has no numeric_limits support, say if it's | a composite | > type, | > like std::complex<double> then you don't get enough digits | to tell what | > the | > problem is. Could the code default to whatever digits | long-double has? | > Again a minor change to print_log_value (in my experience | std lib's ignore | > requests for more digits than a type really has anyway, so | it should be | > harmless?). | | Could you provide the code? Perhaps? void set_precision( std::ostream& ostr, mpl::false_ ) { if(std::numeric_limits<T>::is_specialized && std::numeric_limits<T>::radix == 10) { // All decimal types, perhaps including NTL::RR, // where digits10 == runtime set precision // (but where digits (significand bits) may not be meaningful. ostr.precision(std::numeric_limits<T>::digits10) } else if (std::numeric_limits<T>::digits == 0) { // User-defined type or composite type like std::complex<double> // for which digits (significand bits) value has not been assigned, // even if is_specialized, perhaps assigning other values. ostr.precision(std::numeric_limits<long double>::digits10 + 2;) // Default to the longest built-in type, plus a couple of noisy digits. } else if( std::numeric_limits<T>::is_specialized && std::numeric_limits<T>::radix == 2 ) { // && std::numeric_limits<T>::digits != 0) // Ensure all potentially significant, if noisy, digits are shown. ostr.precision( 2 + std::numeric_limits<T>::digits * 301/1000 ); // std::numeric_limits<T>::max_digits10; for C++0x } // void set_precision Untested! Paul --- Paul A Bristow Prizet Farmhouse, Kendal, Cumbria UK LA8 8AB +44 1539561830 & SMS, Mobile +44 7714 330204 & SMS pbristow@hetp.u-net.com