Re: [boost] [test] BOOST_CHECK_NOT_EQUAL wanted

From: Thorsten Ottosen (nesotto_at_[hidden])
Date: 2007-08-31 09:16:05

Gennadiy Rozental skrev:
> "Frank Birbacher" <bloodymir.crap_at_[hidden]> wrote in message 
> news:fb7kpn$or8$1_at_sea.gmane.org...
>> Hi!
>>
>> 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/BOOST_CHECK_MESSAGE:
>>
>> 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.
> 
> Actually my solution is preferable, since you will be able to see matched 
> values 

And that is exactly why the library should provide those shortcuts by 
default.

-Thorsten