Subject: Re: [boost] Boost.Test updates in trunk: need for (mini) review?
From: David Abrahams (dave_at_[hidden])
Date: 2012-10-24 05:35:24
on Sun Oct 21 2012, Gennadiy Rozenal <rogeeff-AT-gmail.com> wrote:
> Paul A. Bristow <pbristow <at> hetp.u-net.com> writes:
>
>>
>> > -----Original Message-----
>> > From: boost-bounces <at> lists.boost.org [mailto:boost-bounces <at>
> lists.boost.org] On Behalf Of Gennadiy
>> > Rozenal
>> > Sent: Saturday, October 20, 2012 8:47 PM
>> > To: boost <at> lists.boost.org
>> > Subject: Re: [boost] Boost.Test updates in trunk: need for (mini) review?
>> >
>> > Robert Ramey <ramey <at> rrsd.com> writes:
>> >
>> > >
>> > > Steven Watanabe wrote:
>> > > >> I. New testing tool BOOST_CHECKA
>> What's wrong with BOOST_CHECK_ASSERT?
>
> This is just two verbs stuck together. Both means essentially the same thing.
> CHECK_ASSERTION at least syntactically makes sense.
BOOST_TEST? :-)