Edward Diener wrote:
Robert Ramey wrote:
Edward Diener wrote:
Robert Ramey wrote:
That's what I think as well.
Currently in tools/regression there is runtest.sh. I should be in your local copy of boost. Take a look at it.
It is there but it does me little good if I am running Windows.
People have to start with something. Robert is choosing to use the shell script for this, perhaps because that's easiest for him. If his solution works out someone else might translate it to BAT, or more likely Python, or even support it directly in Boost.Build.
Peter Dimov suggested running the tests for each library in which one is interested. Fair enough, but the compiler names and the version numbers one needs to use for a particular compiler, as well as the bjam command line, are obscure to me.
See my other reply to this.
In general I find the bjam documentation well-intentioned but very difficult to understand.
Yes, and we know. But how is it difficult to understand? What's missing? It's very hard to write good documentation, and most programmers are not good at writing docs. We even have a relatively new effort to driven by Matias Capeletto, one of the Google Summer of Code students, to improve Boost documentation overall. Perhaps you can help them, not by joining the effort, but by the simple act of providing critique as a user where/what/how can be improved and/or is lacking.
There has to be an easier way.
Certainly. But good solutions take time and effort ;-) I think Robert is driving in a good direction and we'll hopefully learn how we can improve the testing structure from his efforts. -- -- Grafik - Don't Assume Anything -- Redshift Software, Inc. - http://redshift-software.com -- rrivera/acm.org - grafik/redshift-software.com -- 102708583/icq - grafikrobot/aim - grafikrobot/yahoo