Re: [Cppunit-devel] TestRunner

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

----- Original Message -----
From: "Steve M. Robbins" <ste...@vi...>
To: <cpp...@li...>
Sent: Wednesday, June 06, 2001 4:12 PM
Subject: Re: [Cppunit-devel] TestRunner


> On Tue, Jun 05, 2001 at 11:35:58PM +0200, Baptiste Lepilleur wrote:
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Steve M. Robbins" <ste...@vi...>
> > To: "CppUnit Development" <cpp...@li...>
> > Sent: Sunday, June 03, 2001 2:46 AM
> > Subject: [Cppunit-devel] TestRunner
> >
> >
> > >
> > > Looking at the documentation generated using Doxygen,
> > > I see that there is ONE class defined outside the CppUnit
> > > namespace, namely TestRunner.
> > >
> > > Is this a simple oversight?
> > > Or is it intended only as example code?
> >     TestRunner is the GUI TestRunner for VC++. It is not in the CppUnit
> > namespace because I did not want to take that name within the namespace.
>
> The reason I was asking is that I thought the doxygen-docs should
> document stuff only in the CppUnit namespace.
>
> If you accept this, and I grant that it is a *personal* aesthetic,
> then either TestRunner should be in CppUnit, or it should not be in
> the documentation.
>
> That is why I asked whether it is "example" code.  Examples, like in
> the examples subdirectory, would not typically be documented.
>
> But it doesn't seem like mere example code.  It is on par with the
> TextTestRunner, isn't it?  If so, it ought to get documented.
    Yes it is, much more tightly integrated with your MFC application though
(both good and bad, but I'll correct this some day).

>
>
> >     If you have suggestions about the name/namespace, they are welcome.
>
> Namespaces can be nested.  How about CppUnit::TestRunner::Text
> and CppUnit::TestRunner::<name-of-UI> ?  I don't know what the proper
> UI name would be: MSVC?  MFC?
    How about :
    CppUnit::MfcUi
    CppUnit::QtUi
    CppUnit::TextUi
    in which you would have a TestRunner class ?

>
> I'm still struggling with grasping the "big picture" of CppUnit,
> myself.  It still seems to me to have a lot of separate bits of
> unrelated infrastructure.  So any naming scheme that clarifies
> things is most welcome!
>
> Speaking of separate bits, what is the origin of
> include/cppunit/extensions?  I find that the macros in HelperMacros.h
> are, well, incredibly helpful!  To my mind, they should be promoted as
> the primary interface, at least for newbies.

    Michael Feather's implementation (you can found it on
http://www.xprogramming.com). Like junit, it provided "extensions" in the
extensions directory (decorator...).

    When I added the macros, TestSuiteBuilder and co to CppUnitW, I put it
in there since it was not part of the "core".

    I'll send another mail about those macros soon.

>
>
> --
> 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
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Cppunit-devel mailing list
> Cpp...@li...
> http://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/cppunit-devel
>