From: Beman Dawes (bdawes_at_[hidden])
Date: 2002-03-24 21:20:55
At 07:03 AM 3/23/2002, John Maddock wrote:
>I have some comments on the new status makefile/regression tests for you.
>1) I like the regression test code in status/Jamfile - is there any
>of making this generally available as part of the boost build system - it
>looks like the sort of thing that can be usefully reused.
If we are ever going to move to Gennadiy Rozental's new Boost.Test library,
this has to become main regression test framework (because shared library
support is required by Boost.test.)
I've go a little C++ program to generate the HTML tables from the jam
residue. (That's what got me side tracked on directory operations.).
>2) I don't think that the tests in status/Jamfile should be included by
>default from the top level Jamfile - for one thing if a user just wants
>build the boost libraries, they may not want to stick around while
>of test cases build (something that can take some time), for another the
>current status/Jamfile implementation results in quite a number of
>errors scrolling past the screen (see below).
Yes, I've also run into that. The top level Jamfile shouldn't do
regression tests by default. I almost pulled it out, but then didn't
because I'm not the maintainer of the top level Jamfile. The maintainer
(Dave?) might to make regression testing conditional, rather than pulling
it out altogether.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk