Re: [boost] Interest in Behavior Driven Development Interface (again)

From: Gennadiy Rozental (gennadiy.rozental_at_[hidden])
Date: 2007-02-01 15:18:31

"Dean Michael Berris" <mikhailberis_at_[hidden]> wrote in message 
news:45C2358E.3090807_at_gmail.com...
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> Hi Everyone,
>
> I've just recently decided to ask for comments (again) about the BDD
> interface I had been developing (on and off for the last few months). I
> recently picked it up again, and basing from the comments on the
> previous thread at http://tinyurl.com/2xmm2x there's still quite mixed
> reactions about BDD as an alternative to the Unit Test construct.
>
> That being said, that discussion is a good 4 months ago, and would like
> to ask the following questions to those who might be interested in
> something like this:
>
> * What degree of integration with Boost.Test be "suitable"? Though I
> see Boost.Test has a wealth of preprocessor macro's going about, it
> shouldn't be hard to integrate at that level.

I do not have time at the moment to look though your code. But just as a n 
information:

Starting Boost1.34 Boost.Test includes "Interaction based testing" support. 
The support is presented as a framework for different extensions. The two 
"extensions" implemented already within the Boost.Test is "Logged 
expectation testing" and "Exception safety testing". If you are interested 
they are in cvs HEAD and RC.

How does it correspond to what you are trying to do? Do you see any 
intersections and or possible additions to what Boost.Test currently 
presents.

Gennadiy