Re: [Cppunit-devel] hierarchy sample bug...

[Baptiste L. <bl...@cl...>]

> I've implemented the fix I suggested yesterday: TestCaller now has two
extra
> constructors which accept either a reference or a pointer to an existing
> fixture as an extra parameter. Now GameBoardTest constructs a TestCaller
> with *this as Fixture and the correct setUp(), tearDown() and testmethod
are
> called.
> I don't see why every TestCaller needs its own Fixture instance, so if
there
> aren't any objections I'd like to deprecate the old constructor.
> Please let me know if you see any flaws in this approach.
    I would let the old constructor alone, but indicates in the
documentation that the new one should be used instead.

    Humm, just one thing that popup in my mind: who owns the fixture given
to the test caller ? That's may be the reason why it is done that way...

>
> Bastiaan
>
>
> Baptiste.
> ---
> Baptiste Lepilleur <gai...@fr...>   http://gaiacrtn.free.fr/index.html
> Author of The Text Reformatter, a tool for fanfiction readers and writers.
> Language: English, French (Well, I'm French).
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Cppunit-devel mailing list
> Cpp...@li...
> http://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/cppunit-devel
>
> _______________________________________________
> Cppunit-devel mailing list
> Cpp...@li...
> http://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/cppunit-devel
>