Re: [boost] Boost.Tests: Unit test defines own main() function, why?

From: Gennadiy Rozental (rogeeff_at_[hidden])
Date: 2007-12-23 19:30:33

"Jens Seidel" <jensseidel_at_[hidden]> wrote in message 
news:20071220161635.GA515_at_imkf-pc073.imkf.tu-freiberg.de...
> To show you that I really read (at least up to UTF) the documenation I 
> mention
> a few errors in it:
>
> http://www.patmedia.net/~rogeeff/html/faq.html:
> * "provide provide"

fixed

> * "link with libunit_test_framework.lib"
>    that's platform specific!!!

Why?

> * "The reasons for this error is that in your implementation you should
>    specify second argument of init_unit_test_suite exactly as in a
>    specification, i.e.: char* []."
>   s/as in a specification/as in the specification/ (I first read e.g.
>   instead of i.e. which confused me even more, maybe you should avoid 
> "i.e.".)

fixed

> http://www.patmedia.net/~rogeeff/html/open-issues.html
> * "Finish update for CLA support"
>   What is CLA?

I removed abbriviation

> * Remove two or three full stops in the enumeration

What do you mean?

> * "Better Unicode support (reports and log in wostream)"
>   Sorry, I don't see any relation of wostream and Unicode!
>   You mean UTF16 encoding? UTF8 should work fine with both
>   ostream and wostream, right?

I 'll be more equipped to to answer this once I start doing this.

> http://www.patmedia.net/~rogeeff/html/execution-monitor.html
> * "Also The Execution Monitor"
>   s/The/the/

fixed

> http://www.patmedia.net/~rogeeff/html/execution-monitor/reference.html
> * Page misses a "next" link to
>   http://www.patmedia.net/~rogeeff/html/boost/execution_exception.html

This is being reworked.

> http://www.patmedia.net/~rogeeff/html/prg-exec-monitor/impl.html
> * Link to libs/test/execution_monitor.cpp does not work

should work now

> * "wraps a several system headers"
>   s/a//

fixed

> http://www.patmedia.net/~rogeeff/html/minimal.html
> * "other then include boost/test/minimal.hpp"
>   s/include/including/
> * "This approach is are similar" (belongs to folded text for example 4)
>   s/are//

fixed

> http://www.patmedia.net/~rogeeff/html/tutorials/intro-in-testing.html
> * "why testing worth the effort"
>   s/testing/testing is/

fixed

> http://www.patmedia.net/~rogeeff/html/tutorials/new-year-resolution.html
> * s/BOOST_AUTO_EST_CASE/BOOST_AUTO_TEST_CASE/
> * "As a result my test suite became to look like this:"
>   Wrong example!!! data_access_test() was expected

fixed

> http://www.patmedia.net/~rogeeff/html/utf/user-guide/initialization.html
> * "Alternatively in you can employ"
>   s/in//

fixed

> * "with the static library or single-header variants of the UTF requires 
> the
>    specific function specification."
>   Check this! s/specification/signature/, s/specific/original/?

No, namely specification: both signature and function name. And it's quite 
specific. I agree it doesn't sound right though.

Thanks for your comments.

Gennadiy