Boost logo

Boost :

From: rogeeff (rogeeff_at_[hidden])
Date: 2002-03-03 13:14:57

--- In boost_at_y..., John Maddock <John_Maddock_at_c...> wrote:
> >John's approach is probably better. But there should be a comment
> >explaining why it is being done - if someone just casually glanced
at the
> >code they might think it was a mistake and remove it.
> On second thought, in most cases couldn't BOOST_TEST be used
instead of
> assert - I realise this involves some reworking of old code, but it
> be worth it in the long run?

BOOST_CHECK with New Test Library. Actually new BTL provide variety
of different tools. One may want to use BOOST_REQUIRE to get the same
effect as assert.

> - John Maddock


Boost list run by bdawes at, gregod at, cpdaniel at, john at