On 30-10-2014 17:37, Jon A. Cruz wrote:
On Thu, Oct 30, 2014, at 08:58 AM, Alex Valavanis wrote:
In fact, while we're at it, it may be worth bumping the version of cxxtest in trunk. There's a much newer upstream version (4.4) at http://sourceforge.net/projects/cxxtest/files/cxxtest/
While I'm glad to see cxxtest finally getting some updates, we really should just switch to either Boost Test or Google Test. Both are far ahead of the current alternatives for C++ unit testing.
Having evaluated these and helping with adoption at work (including needing to switch some projects back and forth between them as one project's lead kept changing his mind) I've seen that Boost Test has several technical points where it edges out Google Test.
However, in general discussions about switching a few different Inkscape developers expressed a preference for Google Test as they were already familiar with it. Given that the differences between them (in abilities, usability, etc) are very minor compared to their differences from other frameworks, either is a good choice.
I do not have a preference, as I am pretty much unfamiliar with either. But I do think that Google Test is more widely used, and so more people are familiar with it? Perhaps my searches have been biased. An important feature for me is how well it integrates into Jenkins; a clear test report on a website will greatly contribute to its usefulness I think.
Now that 0.91 has been branched, my personal working plan was to fix the 600-800 issues with our outdated GTKish casting macros then shift to updating our tests to a newer framework.
Same here :) (well, I am working on the render tests first :))
- Johan