Re: [boost] [assert][lightweight_test] Quick review of proposedchanges

Subject: Re: [boost] [assert][lightweight_test] Quick review of proposedchanges
From: Peter Dimov (pdimov_at_[hidden])
Date: 2011-01-24 09:54:45

Beman Dawes wrote:
...
> >> * Messages are now sent do BOOST_LIGHTWEIGHT_TEST_OSTREAM
> >
> > I'm sorry if I missed the explanation for it... what is the use case of 
> > this
> > feature?
>
> The motivating use case is the Microsoft Visual Studio IDE, which
> treats cout and cerr as two separate streams. So you get all the cout
> output followed by all the cerr output, when what you really want is
> the equivalent of command line 2>&1

Thanks. I saw that <iostream> is conditionally included only when the macro 
is left undefined, and I wondered whether it shouldn't be included in either 
case. It seems to me that it should; the motivating use would then be

#ifdef BOOST_MSVC
#define BOOST_LIGHTWEIGHT_TEST_OSTREAM std::cout
#endif

instead of the less intuitive

#ifdef BOOST_MSVC
#include <iostream>
#define BOOST_LIGHTWEIGHT_TEST_OSTREAM std::cout
#endif

Yes, in principle, the latter is "more correct", but I think that in 
practice the former is preferable.