Subject: Re: [boost] Boost.Test updates in trunk: need for (mini) review?
From: Gennadiy Rozenal (rogeeff_at_[hidden])
Date: 2012-10-21 20:56:33
Alexander Lamaison <awl03 <at> doc.ic.ac.uk> writes:
> Or just BOOST_TEST as that is now the default testing tool? TEST_CHECK
> an TEST_ASSERTION etc. are redundant as it says the same thing twice.
I need 3 names: warn, check and require levels. What do you propose?
Gennadiy