From: Kim Barrett (kab_at_[hidden])
Date: 2005-08-23 10:44:39
At 1:25 AM -0400 8/23/05, Gennadiy Rozental wrote:
>[...]
>> The existing unit_test main() function is then changed to call a user
>> substitutable function which is required to call unit_test_main().
>
>That is a major drawback - we couldn't rely on user concience.
As I described things, the default (i.e. if the user doesn't provide a
substitute) would just call unit_test_main, so that the right thing
happens if the user does nothing in this area. It doesn't seem
unreasonable to me to require that if a user *does* provide a substitute,
that this substitute must call unit_test_main, i.e. make that part of
the substitution contract.
On the other hand, your global fixture approach looks fine too, and is
probably easier to document. So I'd say go with that.