Boost logo

Boost :

Subject: Re: [boost] new test macros
From: Christian Holmquist (c.holmquist_at_[hidden])
Date: 2011-02-04 15:11:13

On 4 February 2011 11:11, Thorsten Ottosen <thorsten.ottosen_at_[hidden]>wrote:

> Dear Boost.Test Maintainer,
> I think it would be useful to add the following macros
> to Boost.Test:
> #define BOOST_CHECK_EQUAL_RANGE( Rng1, Rng2 ) \
> BOOST_CHECK_EQUAL_COLLECTIONS( boost::begin(Rng1), boost::end(Rng1), \
> boost::begin(Rng2), boost::end(Rng2) )
> And it would also be nice to have BOOST_CHECK_CLOSE_RANGE/COLLECTION.
Wouldn't it scale better and easier if Test macros that play along with
Boost.Test infrastructure be hosted in the specific library, i.e
instead of having it in the Test library itself?
There's virtually no end to the amount of useful TEST_MACROS, and I think
that the Boost.Test maintainer should not need to judge each and everyone of
them to see they are 'useful enough' to be part of the core library. If
author X finds a useful macro for his library Y and wants to document it for
his end-users, let him/her do so in his own library.

Some users will find that TEST_RANGE macros are fundamental to their work,
others floating point tests, integer tests, string tests etc..
Just as serialization support isn't added to boost/serialization/ for each
serializable data type in boost, neither should test functions/macros IMHO.

My cents,
- Christian

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