Boost logo

Boost Users :

From: Dan Muller (yg-boost-users_at_[hidden])
Date: 2003-08-28 12:49:22

In article <bikh3v$i6j$1_at_[hidden]>, yg-boost-users_at_[hidden]
> Hi all. The boost unit test framework seems to lack the xUnit
> buildUp/tearDown (whatever) methods meant to faciliate the creation of
> fixtures. Does that mean there is an alternative idiom to achieve the same
> effect ? Constructing new class-test-cases for each test seems a bit
> overkill.

If I understand what buildUp and tearDown do, then the answer is "local
variables". I'm not (yet) familiar with boost's unit test framework, but
I have my own framework that I built based on a design description on
Ward's Wiki Robert DiFalco. One quibble I had with Robert's design was
the (late) inclusion of fixtures, which seemed entirely unnecessary in
C++. (I'm a little uncertain of why they would be necessary in JUnit,
where they apparently come from, but I don't have programming experience
with Java.)

See <>. Near the bottom of the
page are my comments about test fixtures.

Dan Muller
"So that's what an invisible barrier looks like!" (Time Bandits)

Boost-users list run by williamkempf at, kalb at, bjorn.karlsson at, gregod at, wekempf at