ant-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Steve Loughran <>
Subject Re: AW: CUnit ant task
Date Fri, 16 Jun 2006 09:40:14 GMT wrote:
>> Hello
>> In our project our unit tests are executable files. 
>> I wanted to have something like Ant's JUnit task to be used 
>> with CruiseControl.
>> For this I modified the Ant JUnit task to have a CUnit task 
>> (its a little bit of a hack because I wanted to get something 
>> that was working for us but not spend too much effort)
>> Is this something that might be useful to have in Ant ?
>> The changes to the sources and example usage is enclosed in 
>> the .zip file. Comments, suggestions and feedback is welcome.
> While I'm thinking that a <cunit> would be good as some projects using
> Ant for building their C-projects, Ant is not the right place for
> holding that, because Ant has no c-related tasks.
> * You could open a bugzilla for AntContrib and post your patch
> * You could maintain it for yourself on a website and we could point to
> that
> * You could open a RFE for the CUnit-Framework (similar to <junit> and
> the JUnit-Framework in
>   the future)


I am sure this will be a welcome addition to people who use CC for CI 
builds of C++ stuff (I did this a few years back with cpp unit and 
NUnit). However, the ant core codebase isnt the right place because we 
dont do enough C/C++ work in the project to ever maintain or test it. 
Indeed, we are even working with the junit people to implement a junit4 
task in their codebase, rather than in ant (it gives them more control 
that way)

<cunit> It should go wherever the relevant c/cppunit framework lives (if 
possible), or in some separate library (like a sourceforge project). I 
think ant-contrib would be a good home if they want it, because it goes 
together with the <cc> task.

I didnt know about cunit until today; I have used cppunit. it suffers a 
bit from the lack of dynamic test discovery, but the real problem with 
CPP testing is (a) lack of finally() to do cleanup on failure and (b) 
the fact that if one test fails, it usually leaves the system in a bad 
state for all the other tests. So the order you test really, really matters.

Incidentally, if cunit could generate XML reports in the same format as 
junit, <junitreport> would still be able to process them. Does it do this?


To unsubscribe, e-mail:
For additional commands, e-mail:

View raw message