On 9/7/2017 3:32 AM, CHEVRIER, Marc wrote:
Rather than building a STATIC library, you can build an OBJECT library. In this
case only compilation step is done.
So your are saying that:
add_library(foo_compile_test OBJECT EXCLUDE_FROM_ALL foo_compile_test.cpp)
add_test(NAME foo_compile_test
COMMAND ${CMAKE_COMMAND} --build . --target foo_compile_test
--config $<CONFIGURATION>
WORKING_DIRECTORY ${CMAKE_BINARY_DIR})
should work properly ?
On 07/09/2017, 08:59, "CMake on behalf of Edward Diener" <cmake-boun...@cmake.org
on behalf of eldlistmailingz-5p0dqD/c5lgwd6l5hs3...@public.gmane.org> wrote:
On 9/6/2017 11:39 PM, P F via CMake wrote:
> The `add_test` function can run whatever command you want it to,
including compiling a target:
>
> add_library(foo_compile_test STATIC EXCLUDE_FROM_ALL
foo_compile_test.cpp)
> add_test(NAME foo_compile_test
> COMMAND ${CMAKE_COMMAND} --build . --target foo_compile_test --config
$<CONFIGURATION>
> WORKING_DIRECTORY ${CMAKE_BINARY_DIR})
>
> Then you set cmake to expect failure:
>
> set_tests_properties(foo_compile_test PROPERTIES WILL_FAIL TRUE)
>
> You can also check for output instead of just expecting failure:
>
> set_tests_properties(mytest PROPERTIES
> PASS_REGULAR_EXPRESSION "foo failed"
> )
>
> This is especially useful to make sure that the error is from the
static_assert message and not from another compile error.
>
> Of course, cmake could provide a module which provides a function to do this,
which additionally could help workaround the caveats of this approach. This is
essentially what `bcm_test` in the boost cmake modules do. > > Hopefully, in the
future this module could be merged upstream into cmake.
It seems like a hack to have to build a CMake target, with the
add_library call, just to compile a source file as a test. You end up
creating libraries, even if they are static libraries, just to test a
compile. I understand that it might be seen that creating static
libraries is no different than creating object files, but this technique
appears to me a limitation of CMake. I should be able to add a test
which just attempts to compile source file(s) into object file(s), not
create static libraries.
>
>
>> On Sep 5, 2017, at 11:44 AM, Edward Diener
<eldlistmaili...@tropicsoft.com> wrote:
>>
>> On 9/5/2017 2:47 AM, Dvir Yitzchaki wrote:
>>> There's already CheckCXXSourceCompiles and friends.
>>> The only problem is that try_compile is not scriptable otherwise you
could let the test invoke
>>> ${CMAKE_COMMAND} -P check_source_compiles.cmake.
>>
>> To put it succinctly CMake should adding compile-time testing so that
when some compilation succeeds the test is successful and if the compilation fails
the test is not successful, with the proviso that you can reverse the result as a
compile should fail type of test. Similarly a build type testing, without having to
run anything should be added along the same lines.
>>
>> In modern C++ it is perfectly feasible, especially with template
programming, to do compile time testing, invoking a compile-time static assert as a
compile-time failure. Boost has had this for years and modern C++ has it as part of
the latest version of the C++ standard. CMake needs to update itself to the reality
that pure compile-time testing is a reality for modern C++ and should update itself
accordingly. Only having run-time testing is an artifact of the past. Hopefully CMake
developers will get the message and make the necessary update to CMake/CTest.
>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: CMake [mailto:cmake-boun...@cmake.org] On Behalf Of Roger Leigh
>>> Sent: Monday, September 4, 2017 16:51
>>> To: cmake@cmake.org
>>> Subject: Re: [CMake] Adding compile and build type tests to CMake/CTest
>>> On 04/09/17 14:40, Edward Diener wrote:
>>>> Boost Build has tests for running an application successfully or not,
>>>> for compiling one or more source files successfully or not, and for
>>>> building one or more source files into an exe or not. These tests in
>>>> Boost Build are the run/run-fail, compile/compile-fail, and
>>>> link/link-fail rules.
>>>>
>>>> CMake/CTest has the exact equivalent to the run/run-fail rule in its
>>>> add_test framework, but there is not add_test equivalent to the other
>>>> two sets of rules. It sure would be nice, when Boost transitions to
>>>> using CMake/CTest instead of Boost Build, if CMake/CTest had the
>>>> equivalent of the other two sets of types of test in its add_test
>>>> framework.
>>>>
>>>> Is there any consensus that these other two types of tests might be
>>>> valuable for CMake/CTest, or any way to make this happen ?
>>> I've certainly wished for them. Particularly when testing templated
code where you want to test that certain things fail correctly, e.g. via static_assert
or simply being invalid.
>>> I understand it's possible to make this work partially, by creating
targets which aren't built by default, and then add tests which invoke the targets. But
this appears to have some caveats, such as potential misbehaviour with parallel testing.
Or you can have a separate CMake build for each individual target, but it's extra
complexity. Having a proper means of registering such tests would be very, very nice.
>>> Regards,
>>> Roger
--
Powered by www.kitware.com
Please keep messages on-topic and check the CMake FAQ at:
http://www.cmake.org/Wiki/CMake_FAQ
Kitware offers various services to support the CMake community. For more
information on each offering, please visit:
CMake Support: http://cmake.org/cmake/help/support.html
CMake Consulting: http://cmake.org/cmake/help/consulting.html
CMake Training Courses: http://cmake.org/cmake/help/training.html
Visit other Kitware open-source projects at
http://www.kitware.com/opensource/opensource.html
Follow this link to subscribe/unsubscribe:
http://public.kitware.com/mailman/listinfo/cmake
