Re: Formal review: New Boost.Test Library

From: bill_kempf (williamkempf_at_[hidden])
Date: 2001-12-11 15:33:22

I vote to accept.

I won't comment at any kind of deep level.  I've had no more time 
with this library then what was needed to read the documentation.  
This leaves me with the impression that it covers unit testing 
nicely, even if it makes more use of macros than I like (though I 
admit that it would be difficult to impossible to change these to 
templates).  The only constructive criticisms I can give are that the 
documentation could use some polishing by an English speaking member 
(though obviously this is not crucial to the acceptance or inclusion 
of this library) and that I dislike the timeout portions of the 
library.  The timeouts are way too platform specific.  No matter how 
useful they are, unless we can make them portable I'd prefer they be 
left out entirely.

Bill Kempf