Boost logo

Boost :

From: Frank Birbacher (bloodymir.crap_at_[hidden])
Date: 2007-08-30 19:47:36


Gennadiy Rozental schrieb:
> What's wrong with solutions I proposed?
> You can always do this in your code:
> #define CHECK_NOT_EQ( a, b ) BOOST_CHECK_PREDICATE( _1 != _2, (a)(b))

Yes, you can always do this. But libraries are to make things convenient.

For my part I don't see any point in the new macro. I propse the use of

BOOST_CHECK( a != b );

The standard "assert" doesn't provide more either. And there would be an
exponential number of combinations of warning level, optional message,
and various kinds of operators. Unless these can be automatically
generated I would resort to simple things as the above.


Boost list run by bdawes at, gregod at, cpdaniel at, john at