And once soci's unit tests are in single cpp file this solution sounds
perfect Ott.
On Sunday, March 24, 2013, Alex Ott wrote:
> btw, we can use single-header variant of boost test in case if we
> can't find boost installed:
>
> http://www.boost.org/doc/libs/1_53_0/libs/test/doc/html/utf/user-guide/usage-variants/single-header-variant.html
>
> On Sun, Mar 24, 2013 at 5:13 AM, Ricardo Fabiano de Andrade
> <[email protected] <javascript:;>> wrote:
> > Hi all,
> >
> > I also started working on soci recently and I would like to share my
> opinion
> > regarding the unit tests.
> >
> > First, I already experienced a situation where the only available choice
> for
> > making a unit test was C assertions.
> > So I'm familiar with the issues and limitations of this solution and I
> agree
> > that there's great room for improvement.
> >
> > Of course, using such solution was due political disputes but hey, an
> > assert-based test is better than no test at all.
> > If this is not the soci case (the political issue), there's still the
> case
> > of avoiding external dependencies.
> > Well, almost nothing can be done in this case with the exception of
> > reinventing the wheel (please no).
> >
> > Currently, I'm working with googletest. It's suprisingly simple to get
> used
> > to and extremely produtive.
> > Besides that it has a great support for testing template classes what
> can be
> > extremely helpful with soci type support (integers?).
> > Even though googletest is being actively developed and heavly used, I'm
> > afraid it isn't the first option for soci.
> >
> > AFAIK about Boost.Test, it does also support testing template classes
> > (although not that obvious) and so much more - points already enumerated
> by
> > others in this dicussion.
> > It really haven't changed much in a while but probably because it's
> already
> > very stable (I still miss the mocking support googlemock has).
> > As others have mentioned before, this would be one of the good options
> for
> > soci.
> >
> > So being more dependent of the boost libraries can actually be
> beneficial.
> > If there's a goal of making soci to stick more with the future C++
> versions,
> > of course.
> > BTW, soci has been mentioned in the papers/proposals of the next C++
> > standard (see N3612).
> >
> > Finally, the idea behind CATCH (a single header) is awesome but in my
> > opinion the framework is too immature right now.
> > I think soci could eventually be a good place for mutual colaboration
> > causing CATCH to become a stronger option.
> > It's a win-win for both soci (better tests) and CATCH (more
> collaboration).
> >
> > That's my two cents.
> >
> > Best regards,
> > Ricardo Andrade
> >
> > On Saturday, March 23, 2013, Vadim Zeitlin wrote:
> >>
> >> Hello,
> >>
> >> I've done my first modifications to the SOCI unit tests recently and it
> >> wasn't a very pleasant experience. The 2 main reasons for this are the
> >> rather unusual tests organization and the use of assert() instead of
> some
> >> more advanced mechanism. I'm especially riled by the latter because
> >> assert() is just not good enough: it doesn't show you which test failed,
> >> it
> >> doesn't show you the values of the variables with which it failed and it
> >> doesn't allow you to continue running past the first failure.
> >>
> >> So I wonder what do you think about using some testing framework
> instead.
> >> Considering SOCI existing dependencies on Boost it could make sense to
> use
> >> Boost.Test
> >> (http://www.boost.org/doc/libs/1_53_0/libs/test/doc/html/index.html)
> >> but OTOH all the current dependencies are optional, while this one would
> >> be
> >> semi-required as it's really nice to be able to run tests even if you
> >> don't
> >> use Boost.
> >>
> >> Hence an alternative solution: CATCH. This means "C++ AutomatedTest
> Cases
> >> in Headers" and, as you can see at https://github.com/philsquared/Catch
> >> [1]
> >> it is just a single header and all you need to do to start using it is
> to
> >> just include it. It is also really nice in that it's enough to write
> >>
> >> CHECK( ul == 4000000000ul );
> >>
> >> to see the value of "ul" if the test fails, i.e. you have just a single
> >> CHECK() which does everything, whereas with Boost.Test you need to use a
> >> specific macro:
> >>
> >> BOOST_CHECK_EQUAL( ul, 4000000000ul );
> >>
> >> Personally I think this is a great idea but I admit that I haven't used
> >> CATCH in really big test suites so I don't know what effect all the
> >> meta-programming machinery necessary to make the above work has on the
> >> compile times. Still, I believe CATCH would be a good fit for SOCI, so
> >> what
> >> do you think about starting to use it?
> >>
> >> And if not, using Boost.Test would still be much better than relying on
> >> bad old assert()...
> >>
> >> Finally, this is definitely not 3.2-critical but it would be nice to
> have
> >> an agreement about this before the tests need to be modified the next
> >> time.
> >>
> >> Regards,
> >> VZ
> >>
> >> [1] If you want to see the project activity, look at "integration"
> branch,
> >> not the default "master".
> >
> >
> >
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > Everyone hates slow websites. So do we.
> > Make your web apps faster with AppDynamics
> > Download AppDynamics Lite for free today:
> > http://p.sf.net/sfu/appdyn_d2d_mar
> > _______________________________________________
> > soci-users mailing list
> > [email protected] <javascript:;>
> > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/soci-users
> >
>
>
>
> --
> With best wishes, Alex Ott
> http://alexott.net/
> Twitter: alexott_en (English), alexott (Russian)
> Skype: alex.ott
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Everyone hates slow websites. So do we.
> Make your web apps faster with AppDynamics
> Download AppDynamics Lite for free today:
> http://p.sf.net/sfu/appdyn_d2d_mar
> _______________________________________________
> soci-users mailing list
> [email protected] <javascript:;>
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/soci-users
>
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Everyone hates slow websites. So do we.
Make your web apps faster with AppDynamics
Download AppDynamics Lite for free today:
http://p.sf.net/sfu/appdyn_d2d_mar
_______________________________________________
soci-users mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/soci-users
