CppUnit Framework
Hi, we are using CppUnit Framework to test gas analyser which are safety relevant products. For the certification of the product, we have to do the following: 1. show the specification and the documentation of the all the tools used. That means also for the test tools (CppUnit Framework). 2. Prove that that the test tool fulfills its specification I have the following questions: 1. Is there any specification or detailed documentation available? 2. Is there a proof of fulfilling the specification available? Best regards Christian Fouda Manga Siemens AG Industry Sector Industry Automation Division Sensors and Communication I IA SC PA RD 4 2 Östliche Rheinbrückenstr. 50 76187 Karlsruhe, Deutschland Tel: +49 721 595-1917 mailto:christian.fouda_ma...@siemens.com Siemens Aktiengesellschaft: Vorsitzender des Aufsichtsrats: Gerhard Cromme; Vorstand: Joe Kaeser, Vorsitzender; Roland Busch, Klaus Helmrich, Hermann Requardt, Siegfried Russwurm, Michael Süß, Ralf P. Thomas; Sitz der Gesellschaft: Berlin und München, Deutschland; Registergericht: Berlin Charlottenburg, HRB 12300, München, HRB 6684; WEEE-Reg.-Nr. DE 23691322 ___ LibreOffice mailing list LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice
Re: CppUnit Framework
Hey, On Tue, Mar 18, 2014 at 9:09 AM, Fouda Manga, Christian christian.fouda_ma...@siemens.com wrote: Hi, we are using CppUnit Framework to test gas analyser which are safety relevant products. For the certification of the product, we have to do the following: 1. show the specification and the documentation of the all the tools used. That means also for the test tools (CppUnit Framework). 2. Prove that that the test tool fulfills its specification I have the following questions: 1. Is there any specification or detailed documentation available? 2. Is there a proof of fulfilling the specification available? So the most up-to-date documentation is at http://people.freedesktop.org/~mmohrhard/cppunit/ which contains all my fixes for documentation errors. However there is no formal specification for cppunit except for this automatically generated documentation based on the doxygen comments in the code. As there is no formal specification we can of course not prof that we fulfill it. We have a number of automated tests in examples/cppunittest that you can execute and that test most features and make sure that they are working correctly. I'm not sure if the VisualStudio project file in the directory is still working but I execute the tests at least during packaging on Linux. Help in improving the documentation is of course highly appreciated. Regards, Markus ___ LibreOffice mailing list LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice
Re: cppunit framework
Hi, On Mon, Oct 21, 2013 at 06:20:01PM -0200, José Guilherme Vanz v...@libreoffice.org wrote: has libo its own cppunit? I was thinking that it uses the old project of cppunit in the sourceforge.com Markus knows the details, but in short the new upstream is on freedesktop.org. So no, this is not our cppunit, even Debian plans to package from this tree, etc. OTOH yes, we can build our own cppunit during the build of LO, which is useful if the system cppunit is not built using debug STL, and LO is, for example. Miklos signature.asc Description: Digital signature ___ LibreOffice mailing list LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice
Re: cppunit framework
Hey, On Mon, Oct 21, 2013 at 06:20:01PM -0200, José Guilherme Vanz v...@libreoffice.org wrote: has libo its own cppunit? I was thinking that it uses the old project of cppunit in the sourceforge.com Markus knows the details, but in short the new upstream is on freedesktop.org. So no, this is not our cppunit, even Debian plans to package from this tree, etc. OTOH yes, we can build our own cppunit during the build of LO, which is useful if the system cppunit is not built using debug STL, and LO is, for example. So more or less we are upstream now. Debian, Gentoo, Ubuntu (as Debian's downstream), Arch Linux, some BSD versions, ... already switched. We already maintained a number of patches that were not included into the upstream builds and fixed another set of problems since then. I explored different testing frameworks when we faced the decision whether to fork cppunit or switch to a different testing framework and decided that it is better to stay with cppunit. It is mature and well tested and except for a few nice to have features more or less what we need. Additionally switching testing frameworks requires to rewrite quite a large piece of our code base that is better spend improving the existing tests. Regards, Markus ___ LibreOffice mailing list LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice
Re: cppunit framework
Ok. Thank you for explanation. :-) On Oct 22, 2013 5:41 AM, Markus Mohrhard markus.mohrh...@googlemail.com wrote: Hey, On Mon, Oct 21, 2013 at 06:20:01PM -0200, José Guilherme Vanz v...@libreoffice.org wrote: has libo its own cppunit? I was thinking that it uses the old project of cppunit in the sourceforge.com Markus knows the details, but in short the new upstream is on freedesktop.org. So no, this is not our cppunit, even Debian plans to package from this tree, etc. OTOH yes, we can build our own cppunit during the build of LO, which is useful if the system cppunit is not built using debug STL, and LO is, for example. So more or less we are upstream now. Debian, Gentoo, Ubuntu (as Debian's downstream), Arch Linux, some BSD versions, ... already switched. We already maintained a number of patches that were not included into the upstream builds and fixed another set of problems since then. I explored different testing frameworks when we faced the decision whether to fork cppunit or switch to a different testing framework and decided that it is better to stay with cppunit. It is mature and well tested and except for a few nice to have features more or less what we need. Additionally switching testing frameworks requires to rewrite quite a large piece of our code base that is better spend improving the existing tests. Regards, Markus ___ LibreOffice mailing list LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice ___ LibreOffice mailing list LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice
cppunit framework
Hello, everybody! I was looking for some task to work on and I found this one: *Bug 48024* https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=48024 - Convert C++ unit test from JUnit to CppUnit Reading about cppunit I read this on its wiki: Notes: this wiki as been recently (December 2008) resurected from an old backup, so some information may be out of date. Why Libreoffice uses cppunit, considering that is abandoned project? Is legacy? Thank you! -- Att. José Guilherme Vanz br.linkedin.com/pub/josé-guilherme-vanz/51/b27/58b/http://br.linkedin.com/pub/jos%C3%A9-guilherme-vanz/51/b27/58b/ O sofrimento é passageiro, desistir é para sempre - Bernardo Fonseca, recordista da Antarctic Ice Marathon. ___ LibreOffice mailing list LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice
Re: cppunit framework
Hi, On Mon, Oct 21, 2013 at 01:29:22AM -0200, José Guilherme Vanz v...@libreoffice.org wrote: Why Libreoffice uses cppunit, considering that is abandoned project? Is legacy? No, it's not legacy at all. The up to date git repo is here: http://cgit.freedesktop.org/libreoffice/cppunit Miklos signature.asc Description: Digital signature ___ LibreOffice mailing list LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice
