Subject: Re: [boost] [Polygon] unit tests
From: Steven Watanabe (watanabesj_at_[hidden])
Date: 2009-09-02 17:23:14
Simonson, Lucanus J wrote:
> My unit test does return non-zero error code. I consider any failure to be critically important, so if I had multiple failures I imagine I would fix them one at a time until all were fixed and the unit test passes. Having multiple files would help in the circumstance where multiple developers are breaking and fixing different pieces of the code simultaneously. Since I was the sole author I didn't need to provide a testing methodology suitable for team development. Also, it is possible for different developers to make changes on a branch and have unit test passing be a requirement for checking into the trunk.
For me a more important reason to separate the tests into multiple
is that by doing so a compilation failure in one file will not mask
other failures in
other files. This makes it easier to tell how close the library is to
a particular compiler.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk