Displaying 7 results from an estimated 7 matches for "sample5_unittest".
2008 Dec 28
5
[LLVMdev] [Patch] Adding unit tests to LLVM
...to setup and run tests.
Google Test, on the other hand, has no external dependencies, and is
distributed as a dozen of .h/.cc files; supports Makefile, SCons, and Xcode;
and doesn't use exceptions or RTTI.
Sample usage of GTest:
http://code.google.com/p/googletest/source/browse/trunk/samples/sample5_unittest.cc
GTest-specific LOC besides the #include statement: 0.
Note that I'm not counting main() for either Boost or GTest, because both
provide a standard main() for use with almost all test files.
Misha
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lis...
2008 Dec 28
0
[LLVMdev] [Patch] Adding unit tests to LLVM
...Xcode; and doesn't use exceptions or RTTI.
>
Gtest is much more lightweight, no comparison there. I know that llvm
is not very good with exceptions, but should a test case system
support that?
> Sample usage of GTest: http://code.google.com/p/googletest/source/browse/trunk/samples/sample5_unittest.cc
> GTest-specific LOC besides the #include statement: 0.
I think it links to a library as well.
> Note that I'm not counting main() for either Boost or GTest, because
> both provide a standard main() for use with almost all test files.
>
> Misha
> _______________________...
2008 Dec 28
1
[LLVMdev] [Patch] Adding unit tests to LLVM
...system support that?
>
GTest allows testing for exceptions, it just doesn't require them to work
properly:
http://code.google.com/p/googletest/wiki/GoogleTestAdvancedGuide#Exception_Assertions
> Sample usage of GTest:
> http://code.google.com/p/googletest/source/browse/trunk/samples/sample5_unittest.cc
> GTest-specific LOC besides the #include statement: 0.
>
> I think it links to a library as well.
>
Yes, that's true -- just about any unittesting library will have that
requirement, that wasn't part of the comparison. I was pointing out how
much C++ a user has to write in...
2008 Dec 27
0
[LLVMdev] [Patch] Adding unit tests to LLVM
Just a curiosity question, why push for gtest vs Boost Test or a
different test suite?
I normally use Boost, and their test suite, so I'm more familiar with
that. So I was wondering is one better then the other, or is it just
that someone makes a patch for it?
Regards
Mark Kromis
On Dec 27, 2008, at 12:26 AM, Keir Mierle wrote:
>
>
> On Fri, Dec 26, 2008 at 8:06 PM, Misha
2008 Dec 28
3
[LLVMdev] [Patch] Adding unit tests to LLVM
...use exceptions or RTTI.
>
>
> Gtest is much more lightweight, no comparison there. I know that llvm is
> not very good with exceptions, but should a test case system support that?
>
>
> Sample usage of GTest:
> http://code.google.com/p/googletest/source/browse/trunk/samples/sample5_unittest.cc
> GTest-specific LOC besides the #include statement: 0.
>
>
> I think it links to a library as well.
>
> Note that I'm not counting main() for either Boost or GTest, because both
> provide a standard main() for use with almost all test files.
>
> Misha
> ______...
2008 Dec 27
3
[LLVMdev] [Patch] Adding unit tests to LLVM
On Fri, Dec 26, 2008 at 8:06 PM, Misha Brukman <brukman at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Dec 22, 7:34 pm, Talin <viri... at gmail.com> wrote:
> > (Forwarding this to llvm-dev)
> >
> > This patch adds a unit test framework to LLVM, along with a sample unit
> test
> > for DenseMap. I don't expect this patch to be accepted as-is, this is
> mainly
> > a
2008 Dec 28
4
[LLVMdev] [Patch] Adding unit tests to LLVM
...TTI.
>>
>
> Gtest is much more lightweight, no comparison there. I know that llvm
> is not very good with exceptions, but should a test case system
> support that?
>
>
>> Sample usage of GTest:
>> http://code.google.com/p/googletest/source/browse/trunk/samples/sample5_unittest.cc
>>
>> GTest-specific LOC besides the #include statement: 0.
>
> I think it links to a library as well.
>
>> Note that I'm not counting main() for either Boost or GTest, because
>> both provide a standard main() for use with almost all test files.
>>
&...