Re: [Boost-users] [Test] minimal test

From: Gennadiy Rozental (gennadiy.rozental_at_[hidden])
Date: 2006-04-15 00:18:03

"Robert Ramey" <ramey_at_[hidden]> wrote in message 
news:e1pqm7$g16$1_at_sea.gmane.org...
> Gennadiy Rozental wrote:
>> "Robert Ramey" <ramey_at_[hidden]> wrote in message
>> news:e1ndd8$ebp$1_at_sea.gmane.org...
>>> I attempted to use the minimal verision of boost test. In order to
>>> do this I replaced
>>> occurencs of
>>>
>>> #include <boost/test/exec_monitor.hpp>
>>> with
>>> #include <boost/test/minimal.hpp>
>>
>> Is there any particular reasons why you want to do this? My general
>> recommendation: unless there is a reason stick with UTF.
>
> My understanding is that UTF will no longer support all the platforms
> I want to run tests on.  It seemed that the minimal testing
> environment would be sufficient for my purposes so I had hoped
> that it would support a wider variety of platforms.

UTF will work on all compilers boost runnig regresssion testing on. Do you 
want to run test for any other configurations?

>>> This generates a few problems.
>>>
>>> a) In the tests which use the serialization DLL,  It seems that
>>> references are being made to symbols in the library.  Here is the
>>> output from the link.  I can't figure out why this is.
>>
>> I don't think you could do this. My guess is that you define
>> BOOST_DYN_LINK that will cause dynamic version of execution monitor
>> sumbols to be compiled.
>
> I do define BOOST_DYN_LINK.  But I don't think that should trigger
> auto-linking from exec_monitor or utf library.  I had a similar problem in

I don't think it has anything to do with autolinking. It just adds 
dllexport/dllimport grist to the function definition/declaration.

Gennadiy