RE: [Cppunit-devel] REQUEST: throw user-defined errors in setUp() and tearDown()

[Pedro F. <ped...@in...>]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: cpp...@li...=20
> [mailto:cpp...@li...] On Behalf=20
> Of Michel Armin
> Sent: quinta-feira, 11 de Julho de 2002 8:23
> To: cpp...@li...
> Subject: RE: [Cppunit-devel] REQUEST: throw user-defined=20
> errors in setUp() and tearDown()
>=20
>=20
> Is there a reason why we do not support assertion in setUp()=20
> and tearDown()? The code could be easily modified to support this.
>=20
> IMHO the general question is, what should be done in setUp()=20
> and tearDown() respectively. Personally, I use them to=20
> provide everything that is common to all test methods in a=20
> class. This also includes setting up a particular state of my=20
> (product code) environment that is a precondition for all the=20
> tests in a testcase class. And of course, this will lead to=20
> code that might fail (for whatever reason). Therefore I like=20
> the idea of being able to have asserts in the setUp() and=20
> tearDown() methods, because these would lead to a more=20
> precise error/failure message, why the test-methods couldn't=20
> be executed successfully. And locating bugs in our programs=20
> is the primary goal of this project, isn't it?
>=20
> Any other opinions?

Agreed.

Cheers,

Pedro
_______________________________________________________
Pedro Alves Ferreira
INESC Porto
Campus da FEUP                   Tel: +351 22 209 42 52
Rua Dr. Roberto Frias, n=BA 378    Fax: +351 22 208 41 72
4200-465 PORTO                 http://www.inescporto.pt
Portugal            mailto:ped...@in...