Re: [Boost-users] [tests] Signals not well covered in unittests (in contrast to exceptions)?

From: Gennadiy Rozental (rogeeff_at_[hidden])
Date: 2007-08-14 00:41:19

"Jens Seidel" <jensseidel_at_[hidden]> wrote in message 
news:20070802194000.GA11998_at_pluto.sol.de...
> On Thu, Aug 02, 2007 at 01:39:03PM -0400, Gennadiy Rozental wrote:
>> > "Jens Seidel" <jensseidel_at_[hidden]> wrote in message
>> > news:20070726151640.GA19199_at_imkf-pc073.imkf.tu-freiberg.de...
>> > I have the following problem with a C++ project on Linux using the
>> > Boost.test framework:
>>
>> Can you write simple example that show the problem?
>
> Hhm, OK, I tried so but noticed that my initial attempt (throwing an
> exception from a signal handler (after recieving a "division by
> zero" signal) on a POSIX platform) is just undefined by ANSI C++.
>
> Maybe someone has nevertheless a good idea how to continue a test without
> the effects of previous tests.
>
> The attached example test1.cpp demonstrates that destructors are not
> called if a signal is raised, so that some global data structures are not
> cleared. Bad ...
>
> If an exception is thrown indstead of a signal all works as expected.
> That's why I initially thought that I just write my own signal handler
> and throw an exception from it to clear my data structures for the
> next tests ... (test2.cpp)
>
> It's no longer important but test2.cpp demonstrates indeed that my own
> signal handler (which now just calls abort()) is not called by
> Boost.test which is probably a bug.

I will look into these

Gennadiy