Re: [Boost-users] [Boost.Test] reporting tests with warnings

Subject: Re: [Boost-users] [Boost.Test] reporting tests with warnings
From: Gennadiy Rozental (rogeeff_at_[hidden])
Date: 2011-11-17 00:31:39

Richard <legalize+jeeves <at> mail.xmission.com> writes:
> >Boost.Test already support three "symbols":
> >
> >  BOOST_REQUIRE_*
> >  BOOST_CHECK_*
> >  BOOST_WARN_*
> >
> >What you're seems to be implying is that BOOST_WARN_* is a bad idea.
> 
> Not just BOOST_WARN_*, but also BOOST_CHECK_* since they keep
> executing a failed test case.

Why so radical view? This is TDD purist position and is not necessarily the only
one. 

> If you keep executing a test case
> that's already failed, it is highly likely in C++ that the test
> runner will simply crash.

This is simply not true.

Gennadiy