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

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: Edward Diener (eldiener_at_[hidden])
Date: 2016-05-22 19:57:49

On 5/22/2016 7:08 PM, Viktor Kirilov wrote:
> On Sun, May 22, 2016 at 9:49 PM, Vicente J. Botet Escriba <
> vicente.botet_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>
>> Le 22/05/2016 à 14:12, Viktor Kirilov a écrit :
>>
>>> Hello!
>>>
>>> I just released doctest - https://github.com/onqtam/doctest
>>> All the info about it can be found on github.
>>>
>>> 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?
>>> Will it or boost benefit from that addition?
>>>
>>> Also I've sort-of followed the Best Practice Handbook (I consider it very
>>> valuable) as much as possible -
>>> https://svn.boost.org/trac/boost/wiki/BestPracticeHandbook
>>>
>>> Any feedback will be greatly appreciated. Thanks!
>>>
>>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> I like the CATCH way, so I should like yours ;-)
>>
>> I see that doctest doesn't depends on any Boost library. This is a good
>> thing for a test library.
>>
>> You should change the license before the review.
>>
>> As Peter say, prefix all the macros by BOOST_DT_ e.g.
>> Move the file to a include/boost folder.
>>
>> Beside the markdown pages, Is there an html documentation?
>>
>> Where are the test? in the example folder? Boost use to have a specific
>> test folder with unit tets.
>>
>>
>> Vicente
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Unsubscribe & other changes:
>> http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost
>>
>
> no html documentation currently - but it can be generated from the markdown
> - but I'm guessing it has to look like all the rest in boost - is using
> boostBook/quickBook mandatory?

No. But Quickbook is easy to use to generate HTML and optionally PDF. 
Also doxygen comments can be combined with Quickbook quite easily.

>
> I know there have to be some changes before submitting it for review -
> license, docs, tests, boost build for tests (currently only examples).
>
> I just wanted an opinion if this is a direction worth pursuing.

I think it is worth pursuing.

>
> Also I have a bunch of stuff planned in a roadmap
>
> https://github.com/onqtam/doctest/blob/master/doc/markdown/roadmap.md
>
> Do you think something from that list HAS to be implemented before
> submitting the library?

No. But feel free to improve things as you wish or based on people's 
comments.

>
> Also reddit has exploded -
> https://www.reddit.com/r/cpp/comments/4kibl4/doctest_the_lightest_feature_rich_c_single_header/

Good for your library.