"Gennadiy Rozental" <gennadiy.rozental@thomson.com> writes:
Actually, maybe my concerns can be addressed by going back into boost test and using the "minimal" option.
That might help, but the author is opposed to adding the facilities needed to make that viable for me. I can't turn off the crash handlers on Windows, for example, so debugging a problem in a "minimal test" application is often prohibitive.
Ok. Let's say I do this. How would your test behave during regression tests run? Hung the system? Crash? Show dialog message? Remember: no CLA.
What do you mean, "no CLA?" It _is_ possible to specify command-line arguments in a Jamfile. Regardless, an environment variable would be a reasonable approach.
Hmmm - I don't we want to invoke the debugger in the regression tests.
What happens on the testers machine if it runs this program?
#include <cassert> int main() { assert(0); }
If it throws up a dialog and if we have no test monitor to kill it, I agree that we ought to have something in place to make sure no dialog comes up. But I was sure the test script *did* start a monitor that could kill off any hung applications (?)
What if somebody else running regression tests that do not have such monitor?
If we don't have a portable monitor that everyone can use, I wouild think we'd want some crash protection from a library. On the other hand, I have lots of tests that just use good-old-<cassert>, and those have never, to my knowledge, caused a problem for testers. So that tells me the only need for a monitor is for killing hung processes. -- Dave Abrahams Boost Consulting www.boost-consulting.com