From: Stefan Seefeld (seefeld_at_[hidden])
Date: 2003-11-19 10:32:50
Vladimir Prus wrote:
> I think I've mentioned QMTest some time ago, but I'm not sure what followed.
> Speaking for myself, while QMTest is good for me (I use it for system tests),
> it lacks one of the primary advantages of Boost regression system: it does
> not track dependencies between sources. I.e. if you change a single source,
> Boost regression system will recompile/run only binaries that depend on it.
> With QMTest, you'll rerun everything. At least I don't know a way to prevent
Indeed, tracking source dependencies is not in the scope of qmtest.
However, since you can 'qmtest run my.test.in.a suite', it's easy enough
to hook it it up with everyone's preferred build system. (I wrote my
test database implementation to integrate with the make/autoconf based
build system, and I'm sure doing a similar thing for bjam is equally
> And.. running unit tests during rebuild is much more convenient than "Run All
> Tests" menu item in QMTest ;-)
I'v never used qmtest's gui interface. I drive the tests via make, as
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk