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

From: Gennadiy Rozental (gennadiy.rozental_at_[hidden])
Date: 2005-04-06 10:49:01

> Well, that's why I use a Perl script.  If you turn the various output
> levels up high enough, you get (at the end of the test suite output)
> a unit-test by unit-test summary of each test, how many assertions
> passed, how many failed, and how many were expected to fail; that's
> what I use Perl to chop up.

I think XML output would be easier to "chop up", especially if you could 
employ existing XML parser

> One the one hand, I'm wondering if it wouldn't be possible to arrange
> for the test suite to supply the user with all this info via some API
> - say, a map of test names to test result structures, or some such -
> at which point you could arrange the output to look like whatever you
> want, all within the unit test suite.

You do have an ability ot write custom log and report formatters.

> On the other hand, for some unit tests it's hard to avoid having
> various things output to the console.  For example, I've got some
> unit tests that test our error handling code, including the bit that
> dumps messages to stderr and quits.

I recomment using output_test_stream for testing output operations

> Unless I build into our error
> handling code some way to redirect these error messages (and I don't
> really want to do this), this stuff is going to end up in the unit
> test's output, and I don't see any way around that.  Thus, my current
> thinking: the output from running the unit test suite is A) saved and
> compared with 'canonical' output,

Again output_test_stream have a nabiltiy ot match to the pattern file.

> and B) parsed for the information I
> want.
>
> I'm sure there's a way to get into the library code and get control
> of what it does on a lower level.  If there isn't, Gennadiy can
> probably arrange for there to be. :-)

I think you already have almost everything you need. The rest (configuration 
file support for example) is comming

Gennadiy