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: Andrzej Krzemienski (akrzemi1_at_[hidden])
Date: 2016-05-23 05:13:23

2016-05-22 14:12 GMT+02:00 Viktor Kirilov <vik.kirilov_at_[hidden]>:

> 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!
>

One reason I would go for libraries like Boost.Test or GTest is the ability
to define parametrized test cases:
http://www.boost.org/doc/libs/1_61_0/libs/test/doc/html/boost_test/tests_organization/test_cases/test_case_generation.html

Does doctest offer or plans to offer such thing?

Let me remark, that Boost.Test also has this feature from Catch that it
does not treat BOOST_TEST(a == b) as one expression, but instead decomposes
the expression tree. The only advantage over Boost.Test seems to be the
compile times, and that is an important feature, I agree.

It would really help if you offered a comparison between Boost.Test and
doctest. I have an impression that many people do not realize the
capabilities of the new Boost.Test framework after it has been rewritten.

Regards,
&rzej