Re: [boost] Call for Review: Boost.Test documentation rewrite

Subject: Re: [boost] Call for Review: Boost.Test documentation rewrite
From: Gennadiy Rozental (rogeeff_at_[hidden])
Date: 2014-01-12 16:28:48

Edward Diener <eldiener <at> tropicsoft.com> writes:

> > PS  Boost.Test feels much more complicated than most users need.  
> So we might have a Boost.MiniTest too?
> 
> There is the lightweight_test.hpp in the boost/details directory. I have 
> used this for my own testing needs.

It is indeed lightweight. Simpler? I do not think so. Not from user 
prospective. In fact I believe the test module, which uses this header, can 
be compiled using regular UTF include, with maybe one line change (define 
test case instead of main).

Gennadiy

P.S. This is if you compare with release version of Boost.Test. Trunk version 
of Boost.Test is in fact simpler from user prospective.