Re: [boost] comment on Boost.Test

From: Beman Dawes (bdawes_at_[hidden])
Date: 2001-03-20 15:06:16

At 11:58 AM 3/20/2001, Thomas Matelich wrote:

 >I had previously been under the impression that Ulrich's unittest.h would 

 >be sufficient for boost's needs.

Me too.  Hopefully Ulrich will submit it!

 >  If not,  I believe the
 >cppunit.sourceforge.net
 >project is trying to position itself as the default unit test
 >implementation
 >for C++.

Surface impression is that we would be better off with Ulrich's.

--Beman