Re: [boost] Re: [function types] is_function_type.cpp

From: Jody Hagins (jody-boost-011304_at_[hidden])
Date: 2005-06-06 23:30:29

On Mon, 06 Jun 2005 23:20:29 +0200
Tobias Schwinger <tschwinger_at_[hidden]> wrote:

> Jody Hagins wrote:
> > is_function_type.cpp
> > 
> > is incomplete, as it should test that each type IS what is expected
> > and is NOT everything else.
> > 
> 
> AFAIK type categorization is about asking if an arbitrary type has
> some  properties...
> 
> I'm afraid I don't get your point, here. Can you please elaborate ?

Maybe I'm just being pedantic, but I think tests should be as complete
as possible.  I have not looked at all tests, but the one I did look at
(is_function_type.cpp) seemed a bit lacking on coverage.  Obviously, you
think at least somewhat similarly, because you have...

BOOST_MPL_ASSERT((
  is_function_type<function_reference,my_function_ref>
));

BOOST_MPL_ASSERT_NOT((
  is_function_type<plain_function,my_function_ref>
));

but you are missing several others, including some obvious ones
(assuming I understand is_function_type)...

BOOST_MPL_ASSERT_NOT((
  is_function_type<function_pointer,my_function_ref>
));

BOOST_MPL_ASSERT_NOT((
  is_function_type<member_function_pointer,my_function_ref>
));

I know we can not test EVERYTHING, but we should test everything that
could fail, within reason.