RE: Boost.Test problems (Was: [boost] Multiple link definitions o n Darwintests)

21 Jul
2004
21 Jul
'04
6 p.m.
Thank you Peter. After the release, I'll definitely move Spirit to use this simple, no frills, test utility. The requirements for such a facility should be 1) Works 100% on *ALL* compilers 2) Is transparent and does not get in the way (you can pretend it's not there at all) 3) Is 100% stable (no frequent API changes) 4) Is as simple as possible (less chance for Murphy's law to kick in). IMO, Boost.Test does not satisfactorily satisfy these requirements.
Boost.Test minimal testing facility practically did not change since the day it was introduced (maybe only licence test updates). Gennadiy.
7633
Age (days ago)
7633
Last active (days ago)
0 comments
1 participants
participants (1)
-
Rozental, Gennadiy