← Back to team overview

drizzle-discuss team mailing list archive

Re: GSoC - Add a Proper Unit Testing Framework to Drizzle


>>> 3. adding a new build target like 'make unittest' which would run the
>>> tests
>> Yep, in the main root directory's Makefile.am.  Again, monty may have
>> some ideas on how best to structure changes to the configure and
>> makefiles, though.  I will defer to his judgment here.
> No- the unittests should be added to the automake testing system as
> check_PROGRAMS. I have done this in my version of Pawel's branch.  This way
> the unittests get run on make check and on make distcheck and the output
> gets integrated in a decent manner.

I thought whether I should do it that way and was not sure. Currently
the 'check' target is used for performing the regression tests, should
they be performed together with the unit tests? If yes, I think there
should be also a way of running unit tests only, unless we count
running them from the command line as a valid method. I'm just not
sure what's the standard here :)

> Ok. I take back my backing of boost::test - because we still have to build
> on CentOS/RHEL 5. The version of boost there is old enough that the API for
> boost::test is considerably different. It could work - but I believe will
> wind up being a pain in the ass enough that the extra depend of gtest would
> be worth it.
> So I'm back on gtest with Jay. I'm working on testing gtest across the
> platforms in our build farm right now - I'll let you know how that goes.

What is more, I was thinking about using gmock as the mocking
framework. From what I managed to research until now, boost also
provides some mocking functionality but it is poorly documented, tell
me if I'm wrong. That would be of course an additional pro for using

Follow ups