Re: [Boost-users] boost::test: expected error leads to failure - why?

From: Markus Werle (numerical.simulation_at_[hidden])
Date: 2006-02-14 09:22:09

Gennadiy Rozental <gennadiy.rozental <at> thomson.com> writes:

> 
> > Hi!
> >
> > When using the boost::test unit-test framework calls like
> >
> > boost::unit_test::test_suite* test =
> >  BOOST_TEST_SUITE( "Testing Something" );
> >
> > test->add(BOOST_TEST_CASE(&test_function_with_expected_error), 1);
> >
> > lead to an error in return code when used together
> > with VC7 as a post-build step
> 
> It shouldn't. Could you provide an example to replicate an error?

I extended a unit_test example file and built a vc7 project.
No more gimmicks. Should be reproducable with any of the example files, since
the expected error came from stuff like

void free_test_function()
{
    BOOST_CHECK( 2 == 1 );
}

> > Of course I could use runtime argument "--result_code=no", but then
> > how can I make a difference between expected and unexpected errors?
> 
> Check "Usage recomendation" section in docs. Use above flag always for 
> post-build event

This makes no sense to me (yet). Sorry if I ask again:
Why should I use this flag?
I really want my build to _have_ a failure, when the testsuite has 
an _unexpected_ failure, so I really need --result-code not to be 'no'.
OTOH I want my build to succeed in the vicinity of an expected failure,
regardless of the value of --result-code. 
This was the aim of my OP.

Yet unsure if I understood the architecture of boost::test ...

Markus