1 Feb
2006
1 Feb
'06
7:16 p.m.
On Wed, 1 Feb 2006 14:08:19 -0500 Jody Hagins <jody-boost-011304@atdesk.com> wrote:
Early attempts were stopped because creating and running the tests were just too difficult and time consuming. Later attempts resulted in a mix of C/C++ with test scripts written in python, perl, ruby, etc. This was better, but there was still way too much going on, and it took a long time to use the system, write tests, run scripts, and such. The test framework was not clean and easy to use.
FWIW, I tried CPPUnit and other similar tools, but I think Boost.Test is more flexible and easier to use (at least from the last time I looked at the other tools)...