Subject: Re: [boost] [Boost.utility]
From: Stewart, Robert (Robert.Stewart_at_[hidden])
Date: 2010-01-26 11:29:18
Thomas Klimpel wrote:
> Rob Stewart wrote:
> > > Doing so avoids the mess that ensues when trying to unit
> > > test classes
> > > and functions that use supposed singletons/global state.
> > It is also easier to unit test functions returning error codes,
> > but that shouldn't be the only factor in design.
> A try/catch block may not be beautiful, but calling it a mess
> like trying to unit test a side-effect full function doesn't
> seem appropriate.
The OP didn't mention all he included in "the mess" but just taking exception handling, you need a handler for each potential exception, which leads to duplicate test assertion logic or translating the emission of a particular exception into a numeric/enumerated value that later conditional logic decodes. Either way, that quickly becomes a mess.
Rob Stewart robert.stewart_at_[hidden]
Software Engineer, Core Software using std::disclaimer;
Susquehanna International Group, LLP http://www.sig.com
IMPORTANT: The information contained in this email and/or its attachments is confidential. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender immediately by reply and immediately delete this message and all its attachments. Any review, use, reproduction, disclosure or dissemination of this message or any attachment by an unintended recipient is strictly prohibited. Neither this message nor any attachment is intended as or should be construed as an offer, solicitation or recommendation to buy or sell any security or other financial instrument. Neither the sender, his or her employer nor any of their respective affiliates makes any warranties as to the completeness or accuracy of any of the information contained herein or that this message or any of its attachments is free of viruses.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk