Subject: Re: [boost] What Should we do About Boost.Test?
From: Robert Ramey (ramey_at_[hidden])
Date: 2012-09-18 15:23:04
Gennadiy Rozental wrote:
> Robert Ramey <ramey <at> rrsd.com> writes:
>
>> One small point: I had this problem many years ago which prompted me
>> to (reluctantly) sever dependency of serialization library from that
>> of Boost.Test. It didn't totally solve my problem because the same
>> issue occurred to some extent with other libraries.
>
> It appear that given your approach to test against releases, you can
> actually use Boost.Test if you opt to.
I realized this immediatly when I switched my testing setup to
trunk - serialization / release - everything else. And I considered
going back to boost test. But by that time, there was no incentive.
>> It was unavoidable
>> since I was testing the serialization library with other software
>> in the boost trunk - which by definition/custom is experimental.
>>
>> I realized that the real solution was to test the serialization
>> library changes against the rest of boost on the release branch. It
>> permited developers of prerequisite libraries from having to deal
>> with me.
>
> My point exactly.
Halleluhah - so I've one more person on board with this. That
makes 3 so far - only 97 more to go!!!
It's been some time since I used Boost Test. My complaint
was that it wasn't idiot proof enough. I think this is the
crux of the current complaint. Calls for "re-doing" boost
test are sort of naive in my opinion and don't account
for the huge amount of effort it takes to make something
like this.
Having said that, I guessing that "re-factoring" and
"re-doing the documention" might be feasible and practical.
This could be made easier by upgrading boost tools
and practices.
Stay tuned as I will have a lot so say and demonstrate
on ths topic in the near future. I'm sure you can all hardly
wait.
Robert Ramey