Boost logo

Boost :

Subject: Re: [boost] [unit_test_framework] plans?
From: Dmitry Goncharov (dgoncharov_at_[hidden])
Date: 2009-08-03 05:36:35

Thanks for your reply,

Gennadiy Rozental wrote:

> 1. This subject is discussed in length. Boost.Test opted for
> portability in between platform, instead of interchangeability between
> static and shared libraries. This is not a restriction, this is
> feature ;)
Can't really see how interchangeability between static and shared
libraries prevents portability between platforms.
Anyway, from your answer i understand that it is going to stay this way.
> 2. Am I to understand that you are library developer who ships unit
> tests along with library?
That's right.
> 3. If answer is yes, do you ship your own makefiles?
> if yes, you can enforce specific library there.
It is possible to enforce a specific library. It's also uncomfortable
for the user.
> 4. If not, you can use single header variant of UTF and do not depend
> on library at all.
That's right. This will increase compilation time.

> It's not like your users are going to build your test modules over and
> over.
That's right, the users aren't going to build test modules over an over.
The developer (e.g. me) builds tests modules over and over.
> 5. Your last option if none of the above fits is to make notes in
> documentation ;)
> Gennadiy
BR, Dmitry

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