From: Pavel Vozenilek (pavel_vozenilek_at_[hidden])
Date: 2005-05-07 03:07:47
"Caleb Epstein" wrote:
> I agree with Cliff and propose that this thread-safety (or
> thread-awareness) issue is best handled inside of the Boost.Test Test
> Tools macros themselves. I think the code that a user has to write to
> protect Test Tools macro invocations vs. the code that could be
> generated by the Test Tools doing their own protection might be
> meaningfully different. For example:
A test framework should stay as non-obtrusive as possible.
Does thread safety in Boost.Test mean linking yet another *.cpp
files or libraries?
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk