Add exception handling to with test macro #5
Conversation
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Thanks @mattbaumann for the PR, defo worth putting it, ideally though we would remove the header requirements and just catch generic exceptions; we also need some tests but since exceptiosn can't be throw in constexpr we can add it there to show it works as excpected - https://godbolt.org/z/MMPPz1e4a, thanks!
| #if __cpp_exceptions < 199711L | ||
| #define UT_NO_EXCEPTIONS | ||
| #else | ||
| #include <exception> |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
would it be possible not to rely on stl, can we just do throw and catch (const auto& ex) requires requires { ex.waht(); }?
| #endif | ||
| test(); | ||
| #ifndef UT_NO_EXCEPTIONS | ||
| } catch (const char* string) { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
can't we just catch anything which either has what or is printable?
| reporter.on(events::exception_fail{ file_name, line, name, string }); | ||
| } catch(...) { | ||
| try { | ||
| std::rethrow_exception(std::current_exception()); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I don't think I follow why rethrow is required here, could you elaborate? my initial thought is that catching exception would be the same but I guess I'm missing something?
I propose to add exception handling to ut.
In modern C++ development exceptions are/should be common practice. If a test throws an exception I don't want to abort the whole testing application (all suites that will follow), but to fail that one test only. In the best case, I'd like to see which exception has been thrown to fix things.
I designed it to be fully compliant with -fno-exceptions. The test macro will disable exception handling if not supported by the compiler. Furthermore, exceptions are a runtime-only feature and therefore only implemented for tests running on the silicon.
I know this is a extremely rudimentary implementation, but think the next step should happen in a later pull-request.