Re: [boost] Boost.Test updates in trunk: need for (mini) review?

Subject: Re: [boost] Boost.Test updates in trunk: need for (mini) review?
From: Gennadiy Rozenal (rogeeff_at_[hidden])
Date: 2012-10-21 18:26:05

Paul A. Bristow <pbristow <at> hetp.u-net.com> writes:

> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: boost-bounces <at> lists.boost.org [mailto:boost-bounces <at> 
lists.boost.org] On Behalf Of Gennadiy
> > Rozenal
> > Sent: Saturday, October 20, 2012 8:47 PM
> > To: boost <at> lists.boost.org
> > Subject: Re: [boost] Boost.Test updates in trunk: need for (mini) review?
> > 
> > Robert Ramey <ramey <at> rrsd.com> writes:
> > 
> > >
> > > Steven Watanabe wrote:
> > > >> I. New testing tool BOOST_CHECKA
> What's wrong with BOOST_CHECK_ASSERT?

This is just two verbs stuck together. Both means essentially the same thing.  
CHECK_ASSERTION at least syntactically makes sense.

Gennadiy