I don't see a compelling case for a unit-test library to be standardized.
I respectfully disagree here. Standardisation aids adoption, learning and portability. My view is that c++ would be more popular if the standard was wider in scope. The arguments I hear against using c++ in new projects include “you need arcane knowledge to actually achieve anything”. It is for this reason that I regard boost beast as the most pivotal library to bless the c++ community since the boost project was started. And I see nothing wrong with macros. Except that they pollute the global namespace and contribute to unintuitive bugs? They are not going
away, ever.
We can hope and work in that direction.
Thanks
_______________________________________________ Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost
-- Richard Hodges hodges.r@gmail.com office: +442032898513 home: +376841522 mobile: +376380212