From: Rozental, Gennadiy (Gennadiy_at_[hidden])
Date: 2002-09-04 13:38:48
> I've haven't been following the new Test stuff that much, but your
> words sound like that any code that uses (1) will currently
> _break_ as
> soon as the new Test stuff is released! I don't think that is
> acceptable. Option (3) should be done to fix the problem.
> Daryle Walker
What code is using (1) at the moment? AFAIK it what introduced recently by
Peter for his own testing. And I hope that after introducing of minimal test
I addressed all the issued he had with new Boost.Test, so he would be able
to use minimal test header. All existent Boost tests modules should work as
they worked before as soon as appropriate component is linked in.
BTW I just realized one reason why we may not want to implement option (3)
as it is. I presume that nobody yet removed definition of the
BOOST_INCLUDE_MAIN from their test modules, so introduction of (3)
immediately switch all testing to minimal. I would prefer that by default
regular Boost.Test components will be used. Also it may require to change
all the Jamfiles.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk