Subject: Re: [boost] [test] boost.test owner unresponsive to persistent problems for multiple years
From: Ahmed Charles (acharles_at_[hidden])
Date: 2015-03-17 16:42:13
> From: rob.stewart_at_[hidden]
> Date: Wed, 21 Jan 2015 19:34:59 -0500
> To: boost_at_[hidden]
> Subject: Re: [boost] [test] boost.test owner unresponsive to persistent problems for multiple years
> On January 21, 2015 5:26:56 PM EST, legalize+jeeves_at_[hidden] wrote:
> > That is exactly the sort of attitude that results in the really great
> > book "Modern C++ Programming with Test-Driven Development" by Jeff
> > Langr <http://amzn.to/15bvh9C> relegating Boost.Test to a bare mention
> > in an appendix and using gtest throughout the book for all the
> > examples.
> > Boost.Test is not leading mindshare.
> That is unfortunate, but Boost.Test was, if I'm not much mistaken, originally for use by Boost libraries. That it has a wider user base is nice, but wasn't part of the original intent.
Sorry for the late reply, but I just started reading the thread. Anecdotally, I've noticed many boost maintainers say they do not use Boost.Test because of the same or similar reasons that external users don't want to use it. So, if your point was to suggest that the state of Boost.Test is ok because it has excellent mindshare with boost libraries, I'm not sure it's obvious.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk