On 20 December 2011 18:20, Steven Watanabe <watanabesj@gmail.com> wrote:
On 12/20/2011 08:47 AM, Robert Ramey wrote:
Dave Abrahams wrote:
on Tue Dec 20 2011, Mateusz Loskot <mateusz-AT-loskot.net> wrote:
Hi,
I'm trying to figure out if there is anything I could do to improve compile/link-time for tests of Boost.Geometry library. Currently, the tests follow fairly canonical approach in Boost:
1) Each .cpp file defines a single test program and all local test routines are executed from test_main()
That's your problem right there. The canonical organization is unfriendly to fast test times and I would not use it for my next library. It's better to put more tests together in the same executable, and more in the same translation unit.
Hmmm - I wouldn't be crazy about this idea. The test matrix reports pass/fail often with little other information so putting a lot of tests in to the same executable will lose information. In general I like the idea of compilation / test.
For failures, the output of the test is shown. As long as you make sure that the test program logs all failures, it should be fine.
Steven, could you explain what does the "logs all failures" mean? AFAIU, currently, test_main() in tests of geometry simply return Zero unless any of BOOST_CHECK_* checkpoints fail. Best regards, -- Mateusz Loskot, http://mateusz.loskot.net