29 May
2015
29 May
'15
10:04 p.m.
On May 29, 2015 1:15:38 PM EDT, Gennadiy Rozental
Marcel Raad
writes: If I define BOOST_TEST_NO_OLD_TOOLS, I get a lot of compilation errors because of missing operator<< for the classes used with BOOST_TEST(a == b). Is that expected?
If a and b do not have operator << overloaded then yes.
You can use BOOST_TEST((a==b)) or can use BOOST_TEST_DONT_PRINT_LOG_VALUE(type)
That's a ridiculously long macro name for a not uncommon use case. ___ Rob (Sent from my portable computation engine)