Re: [boost] Formal review: New Boost.Test Library

From: Peter Dimov (pdimov_at_[hidden])
Date: 2001-12-06 11:44:05

From: "Ullrich Koethe" <u.koethe_at_[hidden]>
> Fernando Cacciola wrote:
> > ) I *strongly* disagree with having floating point and collection
equlity
> > tools as part of the test library. They are orthogonal to the unit test
> > framework. I would agree to provide, in the proper place, a floating
point
> > comparator and a sequence matcher, but they should be outside the test
suite.
> >
>
> I *strongly* disagree with your opinion. Perhaps you are right from the
> standpoint of purity and beauty, but in practice floating point and
> collection equality are among the most frequent tests. So, until someone
> implements the external module you are proposing, they *belong* to the
> unit test framework. One can still refactor this later.

Why refactor later when you can refactor now? Why do people think of boost
"libraries" as monolithic entities and use terms as "is a part of
Boost.LibFoo" and "belongs to Boost.LibBar"?

--
Peter Dimov
Multi Media Ltd.