> > There's one thing I'm wondering about. If you get an exception in a test, > it > > won't show which line caused the exception, only that one has happened > > somewhere. In a unit test with 100+ tests, it can be hard to find which > one > > caused the exception, so I started to litter the test code with > > BOOST_CHECKPOINT(), which then shows up at the exception. However, I > > realised that even this was just narrowing down the search, and to > pinpoint > > the error line, one would need one BOOST_CHECKPOINT() for each test line. > So > > why not automate this? > > While working on first revision to Boost.Test I thought about very same > issue in regards to fatal/system errors during testing: How to help > programmer to locate where in test case problem occurred? I was about to > implement automatic "checkpointing" when I realized that in fact it is > already in place in existent implementation: Just set log level to "all" > and last pass/fail message will give you all information you need.
Ah, I didn't realise that. Thanks. :) > So I do not believe any extension is required in this matter. I agree. > P.S. I've tried several times to reply to your private mail. But got > "Undeliverable mail..." message. Here is the question and reply: Thanks for your reply. I've heard that this problem has occasionally happened, but my address usually works. Apparently, it happened again when you tried to send the reply. Regards, Terje _______________________________________________ Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost
