RE: [boost] Test Tool Proposal (test_tools.hpp)

From: Rozental, Gennadiy (gennadiy.rozental_at_[hidden])
Date: 2003-02-03 12:54:05

> void checkMyObject(MyObject* my, int context, int a, int b, int c) 
> {
>         BOOST_CHECK_EQUAL_MESSAGE(my->getA(), a, context);
>         BOOST_CHECK_EQUAL_MESSAGE(my->getB(), b, context);
>         BOOST_CHECK_EQUAL_MESSAGE(my->getC(), c, context);
> }
> 
> MyObject* my1 = new MyObject(1, 2, 3);
> checkMyObject(my1, __LINE__, 1, 2, 3);
> MyObject* my2 = new MyObject(4, 5, 6);
> checkMyObject(my2, __LINE__, 4, 5, 6);

I believe that message provided by BOOST_CHECK_EQUAL is more valuable, cause
it gives the mismatched values.
When you run in this kind of the situation I would recommend:

1. Use macro instead of function

#define CHECK_MY_OBJECT( obj, vA, vB, vC ) \
     BOOST_CHECK_EQUAL(obj->getA(), v1); \
....

This way want loose line information.

2. use BOOST_MESSAGE tool

void checkMyObject(MyObject* my, int context, int a, int b, int c, size_t
source_line) 
{
   BOOST_MESSAGE( "Testing " << my->some_kind_of_object_identification()  );

// or 

   BOOST_MESSAGE( "Perform check on line: " << source_line  );

   BOOST_CHECK_EQUAL(my->getA(), a);
   BOOST_CHECK_EQUAL(my->getB(), b);
   BOOST_CHECK_EQUAL(my->getC(), c);
}

Regards,

Gennadiy.

P.S. Don't forget to set log level to "messages" would you decide to choose
the second solution.