Subject: Re: [boost] doctest - the lightest feature rich C++ single header testing framework - if it can enter boost and if it/boost will benefit from that
From: Peter Dimov (lists_at_[hidden])
Date: 2016-05-22 14:01:17
Viktor Kirilov wrote:
> I just released doctest - https://github.com/onqtam/doctest
> All the info about it can be found on github.
This looks pretty cool. As does your Github name, for that matter. :-)
> So do you think it can enter the boost project? How much work will it take
> to get it into boost except for adding boost in the title?
You should check
and then request a formal review.
Per guidelines alone, what you'll probably be requested to do would be to
rename the macros to use a BOOST_ prefix - so perhaps something like
BOOST_DT_CASE, BOOST_DT_SUBCASE, BOOST_DT_CHECK - and put the header (with
an extension .hpp) in include/boost.
You should also support testing via Boost.Build, and perhaps add test cases
for your internal helper classes (String, Vector, and so on.)
The single header organization is an interesting question. I know why it's
done - it's indeed useful to be able to grab a single header, put it into
the project and be done with it. On the other hand, once your library is in
Boost, most people will get it via a channel (a Boost release or apt-get)
that makes its whole contents available anyway. So perhaps splitting the
header for readability reasons could be of value. You could no longer need
BOOST_DOCTEST_IMPLEMENT then, for instance, if the implementation is in a
separate header, the helper classes could live in their own headers, and so
on, which would perhaps look a bit tidier.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk