From: Gennadiy Rozental (rogeeff_at_[hidden])
Date: 2008-01-26 05:52:44
"Thorsten Ottosen" <thorsten.ottosen_at_[hidden]> wrote in message
news:47986956.1060904_at_dezide.com...
> Hi Gennadiy,
>
> I often want to output message or do additional test of another test
> fails.
>
> It would be cool if I could do it like this:
>
> if( !BOOST_CHECK_CLOSE( aStarEcr, close, 0.0001 ) )
> {
> BOOST_MESSAGE( "\nA* sequence: " << aStarSeq );
> BOOST_MESSAGE( "\nClose sequence: " << closeSeq );
> }
>
> But, AFAICT, the macros are implemented this way:
>
>
> #define BOOST_CHECK_WITH_ARGS_IMPL( P, check_descr, TL, CT, ARGS ) \
> do { \
> BOOST_TEST_PASSPOINT(); \
> BOOST_TEST_TOOL_IMPL( check_frwd, P, check_descr, TL, CT ) \
> BOOST_PP_SEQ_FOR_EACH( BOOST_TEST_PASS_ARG_INFO, '_', ARGS ) ); \
> } while( ::boost::test_tools::dummy_cond ) \
> /**/
>
> Do you think it would be possible have a bool returning function
> instead of the while loop?
I can do what you need for gcc using ({ ... }) . Unfortunately it doesn't
seem ot work for most other compilers including msvc. If you know portable
solution please let me know.
Gennadiy.