From: Larry Evans (cppljevans_at_[hidden])
Date: 2007-10-08 06:10:43
On 10/07/07 20:55, David Abrahams wrote:
> on Sun Oct 07 2007, Larry Evans <cppljevans-AT-cox-internet.com> wrote:
>> On 10/06/07 19:08, Douglas Gregor wrote:
>>> Okay. One could certainly make the executables for some tests
>>> dependent on the executables of other tests, so if the type_traits
>>> tests fail to build then one doesn't build the tests for other
>>> libraries that depend on type_traits.
>>> I don't think we could make chain tests based on whether a test
>>> *executes* correctly.
> I'm not alarmed. It means some tests may attempt to run needlessly,
> but we'll still get all the results we need.
True, but then you wouldn't know whether the higher level test
failed because of a bug in the higher level code or a bug in
the lower level code. The higher level test only says something
like "I've failed test XXX" it doesn't say "I can't run test XXX
because test YYY failed". So, instead of first debugging
lower level test YYY, XXX's author would start searching for a
"false" bug in XXX. THat wastes time.
> I'm not aware of any Boost library that actually creates such
> dependencies among its tests, are you?
I know of no such tests.
Boost-Build list run by bdawes at acm.org, david.abrahams at rcn.com, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk