On terça-feira, 8 de outubro de 2013 09:56:59, André Somers wrote:
> > QtTest can test code with exceptions.
> >
> > Just make sure that your exceptions don't escape the test slots. That's a
> > reasonable requirement.
>
> Would it be reasonable/possible to record a FAIL on an exception instead?
On terça-feira, 8 de outubro de 2013 11:50:25, Dmitry Ashkadov wrote:
> QtTest doesn't provide macro like QVERIFY_EXCEPTION(expression,
> expected_exception). And any other compare/verify macro should handle
> exceptions. This will reduce code in test slot.
Sounds like a nice new feature additio
Op 7-10-2013 21:27, Thiago Macieira schreef:
> On segunda-feira, 7 de outubro de 2013 22:50:49, Dmitry Ashkadov wrote:
>> The topic about exceptions for slots and signals has inspirited me to
>> pay your attention to QtTest. QtTest is a good unit-test framework, but
>> it is focused to Qt. I think
07.10.2013 23:27, Thiago Macieira пишет:
> On segunda-feira, 7 de outubro de 2013 22:50:49, Dmitry Ashkadov wrote:
>> The topic about exceptions for slots and signals has inspirited me to
>> pay your attention to QtTest. QtTest is a good unit-test framework, but
>> it is focused to Qt. I think QtT
On segunda-feira, 7 de outubro de 2013 22:50:49, Dmitry Ashkadov wrote:
> The topic about exceptions for slots and signals has inspirited me to
> pay your attention to QtTest. QtTest is a good unit-test framework, but
> it is focused to Qt. I think QtTest may be used for any project,
> moreover
Hello!
The topic about exceptions for slots and signals has inspirited me to
pay your attention to QtTest. QtTest is a good unit-test framework, but
it is focused to Qt. I think QtTest may be used for any project,
moreover it may be used as unit testing framework for project that
doesn't use Q