I'm all for including it in the same way XmlTestRunner was included, then we can whip up a tutorial for using and creating new test runners. When I was just learning the idiosyncrasies of UT++, anything beyond UnitTest::RunAllTests() was way beyond me, and there was no documentation on the website. You literally had to read through the code to figure it out.
On 28/01/2010 2:48 PM, Sean Farrell wrote: > Hi, > > ok I forgot one thing... > > Vlad or any one sporting this patch, can you make a working patch > against either 1.4 or my git repositories head? Preferably as a git > patch / repository. It is hard to evaluate the patch in isolation. I > thing we can trim some this and work on a middle ground. This since > there where many requests to filter the tests in the past. > > Sean > > On Thu, Jan 28, 2010 at 8:43 PM, Sean Farrell <sean.farr...@rioki.org> wrote: >> Hi all, >> >> I see I have triggered a great discussion. My personal take on the >> issue, aside with special issues with boost, are that UnitTest++ has >> no dependencies except C++98 and that is good. This for two reasons: >> >> * It is easy to deploy UnitTest++ with almost no effort on basically >> any platform. >> * It makes UT++ small and clean. >> >> If you look at the source code it is even optimised to to use a custom >> stream class. This was done since the original version was used and >> deployed to the PS2. And the PS2 SDK did not have full C++98 support. >> >> I personally could live with saying that we could go as far as TR1, >> but that would mean dropping VS 6 support. I do not have a problem >> with that, but this did trigger a large and messy debate. >> >> The second thing, is do you need TR1 and boost? I have not seen a real >> case where boost was a step froward. Yes boost does have some neat >> features, but it is messy in its implementation. It is not very >> modular, if you take one small feature you end of of needing at least >> 4 other modules. In most cases this is the case because boost tries to >> fix and implement all border cases, many of which do not concern you. >> Also coding the feature for you special need takes you no less then 20 >> minutes... >> >> I only looked at the second version of your patch, what did you need boost >> for? >> >> My problem with the patch that is gives you many features you don't >> really need. At least that is my take on the issue. I just plug my >> unit test program into my IDE or build system and that it. I care only >> about output if my test and thus build fails. >> >> I wanted some input if my impression is false and there are people who >> need it. On the other hand I would like to see someone write a MFC / >> Win32 test runner >> that we can put in a add on library... Something shiny that you can >> show your boss... >> >> Vlad, I honestly do not want to degrade your work. But one of the >> features of UT++ is that it is small and slim and that should stay >> this way. There are many bloated unit testing frameworks out there... >> Just look at CppUnit or Unit++ ... >> >> Sean >> >> On Thu, Jan 28, 2010 at 7:49 PM, Vlad <v...@demoninsight.com> wrote: >>> >>> On Jan 28, 2010, at 9:40 AM, Clark Gaebel wrote: >>> >>>>> UT++ core should use only standard C++ and platform specific code. >>> >>> But what is "standard"? Is TR1 standard? C++98, C++03, C++0x ? Plus the >>> fact that large chunks of boost *will* become standard, because the >>> standards committee and the boost team overlap. >>> >>> Yet once again: I have submitted a version #2 that uses nothing outside of >>> STL and I would be happy if it is included only as a contrib/ or example/. >>> I have also volunteered to write a tutorial on how to write a custom >>> reporter with mine as the working example. >>> >>> Isn't there anything acceptable in my offer? >>> >>> Vlad >>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ >>> The Planet: dedicated and managed hosting, cloud storage, colocation >>> Stay online with enterprise data centers and the best network in the >>> business >>> Choose flexible plans and management services without long-term contracts >>> Personal 24x7 support from experience hosting pros just a phone call away. >>> http://p.sf.net/sfu/theplanet-com >>> _______________________________________________ >>> unittest-cpp-devel mailing list >>> unittest-cpp-devel@lists.sourceforge.net >>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/unittest-cpp-devel >>> >> > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > The Planet: dedicated and managed hosting, cloud storage, colocation > Stay online with enterprise data centers and the best network in the business > Choose flexible plans and management services without long-term contracts > Personal 24x7 support from experience hosting pros just a phone call away. > http://p.sf.net/sfu/theplanet-com > _______________________________________________ > unittest-cpp-devel mailing list > unittest-cpp-devel@lists.sourceforge.net > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/unittest-cpp-devel ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ The Planet: dedicated and managed hosting, cloud storage, colocation Stay online with enterprise data centers and the best network in the business Choose flexible plans and management services without long-term contracts Personal 24x7 support from experience hosting pros just a phone call away. http://p.sf.net/sfu/theplanet-com _______________________________________________ unittest-cpp-devel mailing list unittest-cpp-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/unittest-cpp-devel
