12 Jan
2014
12 Jan
'14
9:28 p.m.
Edward Diener
PS Boost.Test feels much more complicated than most users need. So we might have a Boost.MiniTest too?
There is the lightweight_test.hpp in the boost/details directory. I have used this for my own testing needs.
It is indeed lightweight. Simpler? I do not think so. Not from user prospective. In fact I believe the test module, which uses this header, can be compiled using regular UTF include, with maybe one line change (define test case instead of main). Gennadiy P.S. This is if you compare with release version of Boost.Test. Trunk version of Boost.Test is in fact simpler from user prospective.