Re: [boost] comment on Boost.Test

From: Beman Dawes (bdawes_at_[hidden])
Date: 2001-03-20 15:28:47

At 03:09 PM 3/20/2001, nbecker_at_[hidden] wrote:

 >A number of unit test efforts appear to derive from junit.  cppunit is
 >one.  It looks to me that this may be OK for testing classes, but in
 >C++ not everything is a class.  I also need to test plain old
 >functions.  I'm really looking for something very lightweight and
 >flexible, and not necessarily limited to classes.

The "lightweight and flexible" layer is supposed to be handled by the 
current Boost.Test components.  See 
http://www.boost.org/libs/test/doc/index.htm

The issue Thomas was asking about is the open slot for a unit test tool.

--Beman