Re: Interest in a C++20 Unit Testing Framework?

From: Krzysztof Jusiak (krzysztof_at_[hidden])
Date: 2019-11-27 21:09:47

FYI, [Boost].UT (since v1.1.2) has relaxed the standard requirement to
C++17 (although some limitations apply depending on the standard/compiler
combination).

In general, source_location is available since C++20, however, the builtin
functionality powering it (__builtin_FILE(), __builtin_LINE()) is available
since GCC-9/Clang-9.

Therefore, now:
* [Boost].UT with Clang/GCC >= 9 and with either C++17 or C++20 works as
expected (although with C++17 it uses compiler builtin designed for C++20
source_location)
* [Boost].UT with Clang/GCC < 9 and with either C++17 or C++20 still
compiles/`works`, however, the file/line in assertion won't be propagated

Also, MSVC-2019 doesn't support source_location yet neither with /std:C++20
nor with /std:C++latest, hence, the file/line is also not propagated yet.

Example here -> https://godbolt.org/z/XNgMdN

-Kris

On Fri, Nov 22, 2019 at 1:53 PM Vinnie Falco <vinnie.falco_at_[hidden]> wrote:

> On Thu, Nov 21, 2019 at 7:24 AM Krzysztof Jusiak via Boost-users
> <boost-users_at_[hidden]> > I was wondering whether there is any
> interest in exploring
> > a C++20 single header/single module, macro-free Unit
> > Testing Framework with no dependencies?
>
> I have no interest in a library that requires C++20, especially
> considering that C++20 is not even official yet but also because once
> C++20 is released, there will be hardly any users for many years. This
> project seems very much like it was written "just because", to use the
> latest language features, rather than for pragmatic reasons. I don't
> see anything compelling to use it over Boost.LightweightTest for
> example.
>
> Thanks
>