Boost logo

Boost :

Subject: Re: [boost] [test] still broken in release
From: Gennadiy Rozental (rogeeff_at_[hidden])
Date: 2013-08-07 23:49:22

Richard <legalize+jeeves <at>> writes:

> [Please do not mail me a copy of your followup]
> boost <at> spake the secret code
> <loom.20130807T214918-704 <at>> thusly:
> >> boost <at> spake the secret code
> >> <loom.20130802T232929-478 <at>> thusly:
> >>
> >> >I lost my work on new docs unfortunately to broken laptop, still
trying to
> >> >revive it, but I'm lacking time to really get to it.
> >>
> >> I wouldn't bother reviving your work on new docs since I am completely
> >> rewriting them and am almost finished.
> >
> >Do you follow trunk or release state of Boost.Test?
> I've been working based on trunk, but could easily adapt to another
> branch if that is the preferred place.

Trunk is the correct place for latest state of Boost.Test.
> I posted a call for reviewers on May 1 and am on snapshot 6 right now.

Can I see it somewhere?
> - Everything is written in Quickbook
> - It is a true rewrite, not an edit of existing docs

So you do not see aplace for any of an existing pages in your new
documentation? What about examples and existing tutorials? Do you cover all
the components of Boost.Test?

> - Some Quickbook annotations are added to header files to briefly
> summarize the major classes/functions that a user of Boost.Test is
> likely to care about: test_unit, test_case, test_suite,
> master_test_suite_t, test_observer, unit_test_log_t,
> unit_test_log_formatter, init_unit_test_func, unit_test_main.

Why does this need to be part of source code?

> - Boost.Test code in trunk is used as "the truth" for understanding
> how something actually works

So, you reverse engeneer all new features, right? Decorators, data based
testing, New testing tools (what about old tools?), test unit filtering?

Would you be interested in my input? We can take this offline.


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