From: Gennadiy Rozental (gennadiy.rozental_at_[hidden])
Date: 2007-02-23 13:28:54
"Dave Steffen" <dgsteffen_at_[hidden]> wrote in message
> Gennadiy Rozental writes:
> > "Dave Steffen" <dgsteffen_at_[hidden]> wrote in message
> > news:17881.53633.397413.288713_at_yttrium.numerica.us...
> > > > What particularly you are missing/don't like in current interface
> > > > presented by Boost.Test (other than FP comparison tools interface)?
> > >
> > > Well, the naming and behavior of the floating point comparisons, for
> > > one thing.
> > Could you be please more strait to the point. I need some specifics
> > instead
> > of general "I don't like behavior"
> > What behavior? Which comparisons? How would you like it to behave?
> > Specific
> > examples please.
> As I've said before, the use of percentages to specify tolerances
> drives me crazy. But, as a stronger (and more useful statement), the
> continued existence of this thread, with all kinds of different
> opinions about what kinds of comparisons should be supported and what
> they should be named, is empirical evidence that A) I'm not the only
> one who doesn't like that, and B) nobody agrees on a better solution.
> In other words, it's not an easy problem. :-)
I think you are overstating disagreement a bit, don't you agree?
What do you think about interfaces shaping up in other thread?
> BOOST_CHECK_DIFFERENCE( a,b, PERCENT( t ) )
> BOOST_CHECK_DIFFERENCE( a,b, RELATIVE( t ) )
> BOOST_CHECK_DIFFERENCE( a,b, EPSILON( t ) )
> BOOST_CHECK_DIFFERENCE( a,b, ABSOLUTE( t ) )
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk