23 Oct
2012
23 Oct
'12
9:35 p.m.
Thorsten Ottosen <thorsten.ottosen <at> dezide.com> writes:
One option I thought about is to introduce a mode where this new tool is named BOOST_CHECK and old BOOST_CHECK is renamed into BOOST_CHECK_...something.
Sounds like a good option. It won't break anything, will it?
Unfortunately it might. Two glaring examples which are not supported are: BOOST_CHECKA(a || b); BOOST_CHECKA(a && b); Following would work: BOOST_CHECKA((a||b)); BOOST_CHECKA(a|b); Ternary operator does not work either. Otherwise I could have just replaced implementation and be done with it.