[Cppunit-devel] equality of const objects

[Steve M. R. <ste...@vi...>]

On Tue, Sep 25, 2001 at 02:56:55PM +0200, Baptiste Lepilleur wrote:

>   I'm not saying to change CppUnit as a whole. The only thing I want
>   to change is those part of CppUnit that would impose on the
>   "user" policy:
> 
>  struct assertion_traits 
>   {  
>       static bool equal( const T& x, const T& y )
> => change to 
>       static bool equal( T& x, T& y )
> 
>   and 
>     template <class T>
>     void assertEquals( const T& expected,
>                        const T& actual,
> => change to:
>     template <class T>
>     void assertEquals( T& expected,
>                        T& actual,
>  
>   The change is invisible for user that apply the "const" policy, and allow 
> user who don't to use the assertEquals without having to do const_cast.

Sorry Baptiste, I do not understand.  Why do you say that using const
references makes writing equal() black magic?  Can you give us a short
example of a class that is problematic for equal(const&,const&)?

I'm worried about making the change you propose.  I use const a lot,
and I'm sure that I have CppUnit tests in functions that are
passed const references:

	foo( const T& x )
	{
	    T y(blahblah);
	    CPPUNIT_ASSERT_EQUAL(x,y);
	}

I think your proposed change would break my code, wouldn't it?


Thanks,
-Steve

-- 
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