Boost logo

Boost :

Subject: Re: [boost] [test] Looking for co-developer/maintainer
From: Darryl Green (darryl.green_at_[hidden])
Date: 2014-02-20 06:21:00


On 20 February 2014 05:54, Richard <legalize+jeeves_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> [Please do not mail me a copy of your followup]
>
> boost_at_[hidden] spake the secret code
> <CADJ=SEMqYFoCaZi9m+MPzu1_n=4QD3Y3Yd1wDH526foFXuxSeA_at_[hidden]> thusly:
>
>>However docs on extending and using the lib beyond basic use cases
>>(eg traversing the tests for producing custom result formats) are much
>>needed.
>
> That's a reasonable request. However, this information is missing
> from the current documentation, so my version doesn't make things any
> worse.
>

Yes it does. It doesn't even mention or imply that it is possible.
There are hints that you can extend (yes, the docs are not good - but
that is different from missing) for example:

http://www.boost.org/doc/libs/1_55_0/libs/test/doc/html/utf/user-guide/test-output/results-report.html

> I am curious how many people need this advanced functionality. If one
> person needs it, then it's lower priority than if a bunch of people
> need it.

Well, as you apparently talk to lots of boost test users - ask them.

All I know is that I needed it and others clearly have otherwise I
wouldn't have found questions and answers including code examples on
the web.
It would be nice to have it in the docs.

traversing the test tree:
http://stackoverflow.com/questions/8550704/boost-unit-test-list-available-tests

custom log formats:
http://www.eld.leidenuniv.nl/~moene/Home/projects/testdox/boosttest/

But regardless - Are we going to start voting for which public
interfaces of boost libraries should be documented or can we take it
as a given they all should be?

>
>>The docs on how the library works "internally" are needed to be
>>able to use those extension points effectively.
>
> None of this is documented currently.

You have argued quite strongly *against* documenting these features in
this thread.

I am simply pointing out that there is a need for this doc.

I shouldn't really need to say this but :

None of this is a criticism of the documentation work you have done already.

None of it is a criticism of the functionality Gennadiy has coded.

None of it is arguing for anything more than making the existing
functionality (all of it) easier to use by documenting it.


Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk