| -----Original Message----- | From: boost-bounces@lists.boost.org | [mailto:boost-bounces@lists.boost.org] On Behalf Of Gennadiy Rozental | Sent: 08 February 2006 16:58 | To: boost@lists.boost.org | Subject: Re: [boost] [Test] Link succeeds without | BOOST_TEST_MAIN defined | | > | BOOST_TEST_MAIN mark one of the files as main in multifiles | > | test module. But | > | it does not affect the master test suite name. | > | BOOST_TEST_MODULE names | > | master test suite and also enforce BOOST_TEST_MAIN since only | > | one "main" | > | file could name the master test suite. | > | > So would BOOST_TEST_MODULE be better named BOOST_TEST_MASTER_SUITE? | > | > (And if no parameter provided, then it is called "Master Test Suite" | > | > But if | > | > BOOST_TEST_MASTER_SUITE "My Test Master Suite" | > | > then called My Test Master Suite | > | > Or am I still confused? | > | > Paul | | I prefer shorter names. Test module name is equivalent for | the master test suite name. OK, but will it allow one to NAME the master test suite? Paul PS Talking of names I don't really like BOOST_CHECK_SMALL and IMO it should be BOOST_CHECK_SMALLER (only 2 letters longer ;¬) because it is really an absolute less_than function (MACRO).
>>>>>>>>>> EVERYONE : <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
Is anyone actually using this function yet???? Could we change its name without distress? -- Paul A Bristow Prizet Farmhouse, Kendal, Cumbria UK LA8 8AB Phone and SMS text +44 1539 561830, Mobile and SMS text +44 7714 330204 mailto: pbristow@hetp.u-net.com http://www.hetp.u-net.com/index.html http://www.hetp.u-net.com/Paul%20A%20Bristow%20info.html