Re: Unit Testing Frameworks (was Re: Singletons)
On 12/30/2012 9:28 AM, Balog Pal wrote:
On 12/28/2012 10:34 PM, Dave Abrahams wrote:
This is the nub of the argument, but nothing posted so far backs
up the assertion. The preceding posts all demonstrate the use of
different loggers.
It seems self-evident to me, but I'll try to explain anyway.
....
The only test scenario hurt is the one we already discussed, if you
launch the cases in multiple threads instead of sequentially.
* Therefore if you have two tests that need to talk to different
loggers they either must be in separate executables (in the
first case) or at least can't run in separate threads (in the
second case).
What am I missing?
The last point is correct formally. But IME it is hardly a practical
problem, because:
Actually I take even that back. While the simplest form just using a
plain pointer really fails, you can:
- make that pointer be in thread-local storage
- or not having that, can use a synchrtonized version of a
map<ThreadID, T*> as replacement.
Then the presented examples work exactly the same as the PFA version
again, behavior-wise.
(and Happy New Year, everyone ;*)
--
[ See http://www.gotw.ca/resources/clcm.htm for info about ]
[ comp.lang.c++.moderated. First time posters: Do this! ]