Re: [Cppunit-devel] Release 1.8.0 ?
Brought to you by:
blep
From: Steve M. R. <ste...@vi...> - 2001-10-19 20:59:34
|
On Fri, Oct 19, 2001 at 03:17:08PM +0200, Baptiste Lepilleur wrote: > Quoting "Steve M. Robbins" <ste...@vi...>: > > > Hi all, > > > > I discovered that cppunit 1.6.1 won't install properly on a system > > that lacks "doxygen". So I started a 1.6 branch in CVS and committed > > the fix. I'll make a 1.6.2 release on the weekend if I get time. Is > > there anything else that ought to be addressed? I just found another bug today. SGI CC chokes without this patch: --- examples/cppunittest/TestSetUpTest.h 2001/06/11 19:56:23 1.1 +++ examples/cppunittest/TestSetUpTest.h 2001/10/19 20:45:01 @@ -26,7 +26,7 @@ { public: SetUp( CppUnit::Test *test ) : - TestSetUp( test ), + CppUnit::TestSetUp( test ), m_setUpCalled( false ), m_tearDownCalled( false ) { This will also go into 1.6.2. Anything else? > > On Mon, Oct 08, 2001 at 02:21:38PM +0200, Baptiste Lepilleur wrote: > We need to readd throw() to Exception::what(). I add mistakenly removed it > during my quest to find the Exception::operator =() problemon VC++, and forgot > to change it back. OK. What I propose is to make a snapshot of the CVS tree, tag it 1.7.0, and make it available as an "alpha" version. My suspicion is, that aside from you, few people are using the CVS version (I'm not using it, for instance). If I do that Sunday evening, will you have time to stabilize current CVS? > > > What do you think Steve ? > > > > I don't understand what you've done! :-) > > Which feature are you refering to ? All of them! It's my fault: I haven't been paying attention to cppunit until a couple of days ago. So I haven't gone through the several entries in the NEWS file to understand what has happened. > Your test runner proposition sound goods. My self, I found two kinds of user > for TestResult: > - Listeners, which provides dynamic feed back during the run (progress) > - Outputters, which print report based on the list of failures and run tests > (since they might print them in an order that don't match the run, grouping all > the sucessful tests together for example, they do their 'thing' after all the > tests have been run). Yes, that agrees with my experience. I might be tempted to call the latter category "reporters" or a test "summary" rather than "outputters". > > I'd really like to have this cleaned up for 1.8. And hopefully I'd be > > able to understand CppUnit well enough to write some documentation ... > > I can't see that done really quickly. So I would prefer to go for 1.8 > (release often), then tackle that issue. The CompilerOutputter and assertion > helper are so useful! I can't see how anybody can live without them ;-) Yes, you could be right. Still, I'd like to give it a week to see if we can get something done. If no progress happens before the end of next weekend, then we'll postpone it. How does that sound? -S -- by Rocket to the Moon, by Airplane to the Rocket, by Taxi to the Airport, by Frontdoor to the Taxi, by throwing back the blanket and laying down the legs ... - They Might Be Giants |