Gennadiy Rozental wrote:
Please don't tell me that I no longer can specify the name of the master test suite.
No. You could. But I found relying on macro is both inconvinient and unhealthy.
On the contrary, I found it most convenient (even though the macro name is a bit misleading). Compare:
--- w/ macro ---
#define BOOST_AUTO_TEST_MAIN "foo" #include <boost/test/auto_unit_test.hpp>
Note:
1 .You are required to put the name in quotes it fales otherwise 2. Marco name is misleading and nonobvios(BTW proper name now is BOOST_TEST_MAIN)
That's what I said (the misleading part).
3. It's usually bad idea to give the same entity two different purposes. It backfire one way or another.
I agree. How about: #include <boost/test/unit_test.hpp> BOOST_TEST_MASTER_SUITE_NAME(foo);
4. It's usually preferable to employ nonmacro mechanisms, unless macro provide real advantage.
I can agree with that (to a certain degree). [snip]
With alternative init API (to became default 1.35 release) it would look like:
bool init_unit_test() { framework::master_test_suite().p_name.value = "foo"; return true; }
Well, to be pedantic: #include <boost/test/unit_test.hpp> using namespace boost::unit_test; bool init_unit_test() { framework::master_test_suite().p_name.value = "foo"; return true; }
It doesn't look that bad.
Agreed.
---
As a side note, why does the above work? I'm not returning a pointer to a test suite.
Read an update note.
Sure. [snip]
What would the simplest steps be to provide something similar using Boost.Test? Perhaps some section in the docs for xUnit users - nailing down how to get the same output / summary using Boost.Test.
Most of the output is configurable by submitting custom report/log formatters.
I realize that, I was just looking for more of a "cookbook" example ... "Introducing Boost.Test for CppUnit users" perhaps. Most my points above are less than essential - they're all minor details. The main thing is that the bugs I've seen have been fixed, and that the documentation will hopefully be up-to-date in the 1.34 release(?). Thanks // Johan