[Boost-users] Re: test library: run a single test

From: Robert Mathews (rmathews_at_[hidden])
Date: 2005-04-05 19:09:06

"Dave Steffen" <dgsteffen_at_[hidden]> wrote in message
news:16979.5792.891976.272184_at_helium.numerica.us...
> Robert Mathews writes:
> [...]
>
>  > - "expected failure" feature
>  >
>  > Cheers,
>  > Rob.
>
> Expected failures look like failed unit tests where the number of
> failed assertions is _less_ than expected.  I use a Perl script to
> look for this sort of thing.  Personally, I'd be inclined not to call
> these "failures", but that's just me.

But, how would you know in a generic way that the number of failed
assertions is _less_ than expected? I'd like a facility whereby I could ask
the .exe that question.

>
> I've found that Perl (or whatever) scripts to grab the output of test
> suites and do something reasonable with it are necessary.  I suspect
> that I haven't really grokked the _intent_ behind the unit test
> library.

Funny you would say that ... I currently work in test harness infrastructure
of some 4000 tests written in perl. I'm looking at the boost tests stuff
from the POV of having more unit-level tests for the individual libraries
(most of the current stuff tests how the system works at an application
level, and thus regression in individual libraries tend to show up as
incredibly obscure issues, if they show up at all!). I'd like to have those
tests be written in C++/STL/Boost (I'm really really sick of Perl) . Still,
reality is, I'd probably wrap this boost.test unit test programs in a
standard perl wrapper so that it would fit into our current distributed test
harness infrastructure. To do this, I need a way query the test program
about what tests it might run if asked, and a way to pass configuration to
those tests.

>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> Dave Steffen, Ph.D. "Irrationality is the square root of all evil"
> Numerica Corporation        -- Douglas Hofstadter
> Software Engineer IV
> "Oppernockity tunes but once." -- anon.