On Wed, Jan 22, 2014 at 11:25 AM, Alexander Lamaison
[...] As for as I'm aware, the only change is to the assertion macros, which move to a more natural syntax:
BOOST_CHECK_EQUAL(a, b) becomes BOOST_TEST(a == b) BOOST_CHECK_LT(a, b) becomes BOOST_TEST(a < b) ... etc. BOOST_REQUIRE_EQUAL(a, b) becomes BOOST_TEST_REQUIRE(a == b) ... etc. BOOST_WARN_EQUAL(a, b) becomes BOOST_TEST_WARN(a == b)
But don't we then miss better messages which actually show the values themselves when the assert fails? I do BOOST_CHECK(a == b) only when a and b lack the op<<, but otherwise greatly prefer BOOST_CHECK_EQUAL(a, b). And what's the point of going from BOOST_REQUIRE(expr) to BOOST_TEST_REQUIRE(expr), i.e. make it longer / more typing? What am I missing? --DD