Boost Users :

Date view	Thread view	Subject view	Author view

From: Gennadiy Rozental (rogeeff_at_[hidden])
Date: 2008-05-07 10:09:04

Next message: Haroon Khan: "[Boost-users] Building Boost with VC9 and VC8"
Previous message: Jean-Olivier Racine: "Re: [Boost-users] Wrong visitor type when using depth_first_search with start location"
In reply to: Martin Trappel: "[Boost-users] [Boost.Test] Why is "less failures then expected" not an error?"

Martin Trappel <0xCDCDCDCD <at> gmx.at> writes:

>
> Hi!
>
> If I use BOOST_AUTO_TEST_CASE_EXPECTED_FAILURES I would expect it to be
> an error when I have less as well as too many errors in the marked
> testcases. However, the Test Run only fails if there are to many errors.
> Is this intentional?

Yes. But if you have less errors than expetected warning is issued.

> Why?

Becasue having less errors than expected is not considerred a reason to fail
the test.

Gennadiy

Next message: Haroon Khan: "[Boost-users] Building Boost with VC9 and VC8"
Previous message: Jean-Olivier Racine: "Re: [Boost-users] Wrong visitor type when using depth_first_search with start location"
In reply to: Martin Trappel: "[Boost-users] [Boost.Test] Why is "less failures then expected" not an error?"

Date view	Thread view	Subject view	Author view

Boost-users list run by williamkempf at hotmail.com, kalb at libertysoft.com, bjorn.karlsson at readsoft.com, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, wekempf at cox.net