Boost logo

Boost :

From: Ronald Garcia (garcia_at_[hidden])
Date: 2002-08-14 12:01:25

Rozental, Gennadiy wrote:

>>Thanks for the pointer. Could a header file be added to Boost.Test that
>>will enable this functionality (perhaps an online_test.hpp) or a #define
>I have no problems with that. On ther other hand I would not want to
>encourage this type of Boost.Test usage.
>You don't want to spend 10 min to compile the library and reuse it but agree
>in 10-20 seconds (numbers from top of my head; in fact depends) overhead
>while compiling you tests. It's your choice. But I am not sure which way you
The win for me is that I don't have to dig up a specific copy of the
library parameterized upon architecture, compiler, and compiler settings
every time I want something as simple as
error messages for standard exceptions that percolate through main. If
adding this feature suddenly adds the need for a makefile (bear in mind
I tend to use 3 different compilers on any given day) and configuration
options, I'm not going to be bothered.

I found that the previous test tools compiled quickly when included into
an application in this manner. Do the basic features from the previous
Boost.Test (specifically Execution Tools) really require a large
quantity of code?



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