From: Markus Schöpflin (markus.schoepflin_at_[hidden])
Date: 2002-12-02 04:57:12
Gennadiy Rozental wrote:
> Test library is all about usability and only then generocity or
> "standart purity". Would you be working with c strings I wonder how
> long it will take until you became tired adding std::string on both
> sides of comparison:
Actually I'm testing a C program with boost.test, so yes, I'm working
with C strings.
> BOOST_CHECK_EQUAL( std::string( s ), std::string( t ) ); ...
> BOOST_CHECK_EQUAL( std::string( s ), std::string( t ) ); ...
> BOOST_CHECK_EQUAL( std::string( s ), std::string( t ) );
>
> and will introduce simple forwarding macro
>
> #define M_CHECK_EQUAL_STR( s, t ) \
> BOOST_CHECK_EQUAL( std::string( s ), std::string( t ) );
>
> Boost.Test is doing this for you now. There is a very little
> posibility of misuse (comparison of pointers as check for
> correctness is very strange things in general IMO).
Why? I was testing some parser functions that work on char const * and
I had to check that the parser moves the pointers to where I expect
them to be. Comparision of pointers is nothing else than comparision
of iterators, after all.
Markus