I found this article very interesting:
http://www.gamesfromwithin.com/articles … 00061.html
It compares several unit-testing frameworks.
After reading this article I am not quite sure, that a feature table would be
really a big h***. I find the approach of the author of
“Exploring the C++ Unit Testing Framework Jungle” very good.
-He sets his own criteria first, tells his requirenments to the framework
-He describes the minimal efford needed, to get the framework running
-He tells what is his favourite (imo very essential!)
After working through the article this morning we decided for CxxUnit, evaluated it and integrated in our project within 3 hours!
In contrast – tt tooks me some weeks, till i evaluated dozens of bug-databases and finally decided to take mantis.
So, I just whanted to say, such an article for each category of tools would be also a big help.
Have a nice week end![/quote:3q75rngy]
Lets first make such form-description for each tools (every tool have to be on individual page):
– Name (present)
– HomeSite (present)
– Requirements (present)
– Sourceforge activity (present)
– Platform/OS (not requirements, because it for client part if possible)
– Screen Shots (smaaaall )
– Parameters(many) (self for each tools, for future)
– Advantages – “pluses”
– Weakness – “minuses”
– Comments or Quotes
maybe something others fields.
And have a short description
– Name / Homesite
– Average Quote / Comments Number