Re: unit test framework

From: williamkempf_at_[hidden]
Date: 2001-10-23 10:20:15

--- In boost_at_y..., "Mike Attili" <yahoomail_at_a...> wrote:
> > From: Beman Dawes [mailto:bdawes_at_a...]
> > Subject: RE: [boost] unit test framework
> >
> > We really need to decide what dependencies we are willing to 
tolerate in
> > the unit test library.
> 
> The unit test tools in CVS only make use of <cstdlib> and <config>.
> Gennadiy's changes add <utility>, <smart_ptr>, and <progress>.
> I've added <regex> locally and have thought about using <thread>, 
among
> others. That's clearly not consistent with the needs of the Boost
> Internal Regression Test Suite.

Just a thought.  In general we don't want dependencies because it 
makes it difficult to unit test the libraries that Boost.UnitTest is 
dependent on.  However, some of the benefits of being dependent on 
these libraries is very useful (I'm not sure that <utility> or 
<smart_ptr> fit here, but the others mentioned do).  So, if you can 
keep these dependencies isolated as optional features you can get the 
best of both worlds.  If you're testing say <thread> for example, you 
don't use any of the Boost.UnitTest features that are dependent on 
<thread>.  This will make design the Boost.UnitTest quite difficult, 
so all such features should simply be avoided initially, but it's 
worth considering solutions.

Bill Kempf