From: Daniel James (daniel_at_[hidden])
Date: 2005-12-22 17:19:58
Gennadiy Rozental wrote:
>>Although, I get the impression that making use of your scope tracking
>>might be easier.
> How about if I put itest::exception into public interface and make it aware
> about scope it was thrown from?
Yes, I think that would work.
> I could turn off leaks detection at runtime. But:
> 1. You could do this at compile time for both library and test or only test
> if you are using included components
I'm not keen on this - especially for tests that are run as part of
boost regression testing as it's nice to use the shared libraries. I'm
not as keen on header only libraries as many on this list.
> 2. It's going to be user's responsibility to check for leaks *and* notify
> the framework (using BOOST_ERROR for example) so that it could report failed
> execution path.
> Does it worth it?
Well, I think so, but I'm not 100% sure. I suppose my concern is that
most of Boost.Test is very flexible and extensible, while the exception
testing seems quite closed in comparison. But, of course, it's at an
early stage and it might be best to get some more experience with it and
see how it goes.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk