Re: [boost] Boost.Test - misc observations

From: Jody Hagins (jody-boost-011304_at_[hidden])
Date: 2006-06-13 11:56:39

On Mon, 12 Jun 2006 01:44:25 -0400
"Gennadiy Rozental" <gennadiy.rozental_at_[hidden]> wrote:

> environment, where I do not have time/permission to build a library
> on. Even  in this scenario I would rather use included version of UTF.

I love Boost.Test, and use it religiously.  However, I've always used
the lib, and never had need for the "included" feature util this past
weekend.  However, I could not get it to work immediately as it seemed
to not have the same feature set.  I was probably doing something wrong,
but I could not find any good docs or examples of using it (other than
to say include stuff from included directory, which seems to be a bit
scant).  So, I scp-d everything to another machine which had the libs
and did my work there.  However, it did remind me that you've said the
"included" variant is available, but I could not use it readily.

Could you please help me locate more detailed instructions on how to use
the "included" variant?  Also, I assume compile times are longer, but
other than that, what do you lose, if anything, by using the included
version?

Thanks!