On Wed, Sep 14, 2011 at 11:39 PM, Gordon Woodhull <gordon@woodhull.com>wrote:
On Sep 14, 2011, at 6:05 PM, Gennadiy Rozental wrote:
Why does it have to be implemented as BOOST_MPL_ASSERT? Can it be done as a separate testing tool? We can consider it for Boost.Test.
I agree that stuffing it into BOOST_MPL_ASSERT probably doesn't make sense, because that should retain its current behavior inside of tests. Test codes that don't compile now, shouldn't throw tomorrow.
I am coming around and agree as well. I will leave BOOST_MPL_ASSERT alone,
It also sounds like it's for more than just testing. So maybe it could go into some other headers in MPL? I do hope it integrates into Boost.Test, that's what I'd use it for.
It will integrate nicely not just with Boost.Test, but by any unit testing
and provide a new interface for this new functionality. framework which can catch exceptions. I suspect it belongs in Boost.Mpl, but that decision can be deferred for now. Thank you, Ben Robinson, Ph.D.