From: Beman Dawes (bdawes_at_[hidden])
Date: 2002-08-20 07:56:49
At 04:41 AM 8/20/2002, Gennadiy Rozental wrote:
>> Well, that isn't quite right. "inline" isn't 100% right either, but it
>> seems better than "online" to me.
>I think that inline would be misleading (at least for the Test/Program
>Execution Monitor headers ) since in fact library is implemented offline.
>Maybe we could separate it into
>boost/test/minimal.hpp or boost/test/lightweight.hpp ?
I think changing the directory name to "basic", "lite", "lightweight", or
similar would be better:
>> >One question is open though: what features minimalist test header
>> I was just thinking of the V1 features. It might be OK to add to the
>> feature set, but the whole point is to be minimalist. So less is
>> IMO. After all, anyone who wants more can use the full framework.
>Ok. I will work on it. How much time do I have?
Well, if you check it in before Thursday, 6 AM US East Coast time, we can
do some testing before the branch for release later in the day.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk