From: Paul A. Bristow (boost_at_[hidden])
Date: 2002-07-30 14:55:37
This test suite is most promising, but I feel a strong need for some
timestamping of the test and of the sources files modification date
if this is possible. Surely this is the minimum 'Good Practice'?
Do you plan for this to be managed outside the test?
Or can you suggest how it should be done, portably of course!
I've posted a question asking for advice on how,
to pass on to Gennadiy, but no suggestions.
Is this really an intractable problem?
Dr Paul A Bristow, hetp Chromatography
Prizet Farmhouse, Kendal, Cumbria, LA8 8AB UK
+44 1539 561830 Mobile +44 7714 33 02 04
> -----Original Message-----
> From: boost-bounces_at_[hidden]
> [mailto:boost-bounces_at_[hidden]]On Behalf Of Beman Dawes
> Sent: Tuesday, July 30, 2002 8:40 PM
> To: boost_at_[hidden]; 'boost_at_[hidden]'
> Subject: RE: [boost] Boost Test Tools and Unit Testing - date and time
> sta mping
> At 03:21 AM 7/30/2002, Tom Harris wrote:
> >>I have been using Gennadiy Rozental's new and improved Boost Test Tools
> >>Unit Test Library to improve my testing.
> >Can't find the new UnitTest lib, where is it?
> In the Boost CVS, branch unit_test_development.
> There has been a long delay integrating this library, because doing so
> required having jam based regression testing and reporting working.
> The problem is that Boost itself uses Test Tools for our own
> testing, so we
> have to have the whole package working before we "go live".
> The jam based regression testing has been working for some time now, the
> new status reporting has been working for a few days now, and
> Gennadiy has
> sent me updated Jamfiles which I'll start testing tomorrow.
> So we are very close to the point where we can merge the
> unit_test_development branch, assuming the testing goes OK.
> Unsubscribe & other changes:
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk