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

From: Benoit Sigoure (tsuna_at_[hidden])
Date: 2008-01-14 05:06:46

On Jan 14, 2008, at 9:31 AM, Jens Seidel wrote:

> $ g++ -DBOOST_TEST_DYN_LINK test.cpp -lboost_unit_test_framework
> /tmp/ccKcB2Ps.o: In function `main':
> test.cpp:(.text+0x3d4): undefined reference to  
> `boost::unit_test::unit_test_main(bool (*)(), int, char**)'
> /usr/lib/gcc/i486-linux-gnu/4.2.3/../../../../lib/ 
> libboost_unit_test_framework.a(framework.o): In function  
> `boost::unit_test::framework::init(int, char**)':
> (.text+0x6fa): undefined reference to `init_unit_test_suite(int,  
> char**)'
> collect2: ld returned 1 exit status

I /worked around/ this issue by always defining a dummy  
init_unit_test_suite symbol (which was an idea and a contribution of  
Hubert Figuiere).  This seems totally wrong to me but "It Gets The  
Job Done".  I'm just sad that I have to write such kludge to satisfy  
the weird need of a library.  Most of the lib I know which need to  
interact directly with `main' require you to invoke a function  
directly from within main. Qt is a great example, you must  
instantiate a QApplication and give it argc and argv.  It's a very  
common idiom.  Yet Boost.Test decided that it was a good idea to  
embed a `main' in a library (!).  What if I want to link with two  
libraries that decided that it was their own right to define `main'?   
Come on, this is almost ridiculous and it seems that Gennadiy is not  
willing to make any effort to understand the problem.

Gennadiy, don't take this remark as an attack against you, I have  
nothing against you, it's just that you don't seem to be inclined to  
understand the issue.

-- 
Benoit Sigoure aka Tsuna
EPITA Research and Development Laboratory