Pros of Catch2

• Header-only library, easier to integrate into projects
• More expressive and readable test syntax
• Supports a wider range of C++ versions (C++11 and later)

Cons of Catch2

• Slower compile times due to header-only nature
• Less extensive documentation compared to GoogleTest
• Fewer advanced features for complex testing scenarios

Code Comparison

Catch2:

#include <catch2/catch_test_macros.hpp>

TEST_CASE("Addition works", "[math]") {
    REQUIRE(2 + 2 == 4);
    CHECK(1 + 1 == 2);
}

GoogleTest:

#include <gtest/gtest.h>

TEST(MathTest, AdditionWorks) {
    ASSERT_EQ(2 + 2, 4);
    EXPECT_EQ(1 + 1, 2);
}

Both Catch2 and GoogleTest are popular C++ testing frameworks. Catch2 offers a more modern and user-friendly syntax, while GoogleTest provides a more comprehensive set of features and better performance for large-scale projects. The choice between the two often depends on project requirements, team preferences, and the specific testing needs of the application.

Pros of doctest

• Faster compilation times due to header-only implementation
• Simpler setup and integration into projects
• Smaller codebase, making it easier to understand and maintain

Cons of doctest

• Less extensive feature set compared to GoogleTest
• Smaller community and ecosystem
• Fewer advanced testing capabilities (e.g., mock objects)

Code Comparison

GoogleTest:

#include <gtest/gtest.h>

TEST(MyTest, Addition) {
  EXPECT_EQ(2 + 2, 4);
}

doctest:

#define DOCTEST_CONFIG_IMPLEMENT_WITH_MAIN
#include "doctest.h"

TEST_CASE("Addition") {
  CHECK(2 + 2 == 4);
}

Both frameworks offer similar syntax for basic test cases, but GoogleTest requires separate compilation and linking, while doctest is header-only. doctest's implementation is more compact, potentially leading to faster compilation times. However, GoogleTest provides a wider range of assertion macros and testing utilities, making it more suitable for complex testing scenarios.

Pros of ut

• Lightweight and header-only, resulting in faster compilation times
• Modern C++ design with extensive use of C++20 features
• Simpler syntax and less boilerplate code for writing tests

Cons of ut

• Less mature and less widely adopted compared to googletest
• Fewer features and extensions available
• Limited documentation and community support

Code Comparison

googletest:

TEST(MyTest, Addition) {
  EXPECT_EQ(2 + 2, 4);
  ASSERT_TRUE(true);
}

ut:

"Addition"_test = [] {
  expect(2 + 2_i == 4_i);
  expect(true);
};

Summary

googletest is a well-established, feature-rich testing framework with extensive documentation and community support. It offers a wide range of assertions, fixtures, and extensions, making it suitable for large-scale projects.

ut is a modern, lightweight alternative that leverages C++20 features to provide a simpler syntax and faster compilation times. It's ideal for smaller projects or those prioritizing simplicity and performance.

The choice between the two depends on project requirements, team familiarity, and the desired balance between features and simplicity. googletest offers more robustness and ecosystem support, while ut provides a more streamlined and modern approach to testing in C++.

Pros of fmt

• Focused on string formatting and output, providing a more modern and efficient alternative to printf and iostreams
• Smaller scope and codebase, making it easier to integrate and maintain in projects
• Supports compile-time format string checks for improved safety

Cons of fmt

• Limited to formatting and output functionality, unlike googletest's comprehensive testing framework
• May require additional libraries for more complex string manipulation tasks
• Less widespread adoption compared to googletest in the C++ ecosystem

Code Comparison

fmt:

#include <fmt/core.h>
std::string s = fmt::format("The answer is {}.", 42);
fmt::print("Hello, {}!", "world");

googletest:

#include <gtest/gtest.h>
TEST(MyTest, AssertionExample) {
  EXPECT_EQ(42, SomeFunction());
  ASSERT_TRUE(SomeCondition());
}

Summary

fmt is a specialized library for string formatting and output, offering modern alternatives to traditional C++ methods. googletest, on the other hand, is a comprehensive testing framework for C++ projects. While fmt excels in its specific domain, googletest provides a broader set of tools for unit testing and test-driven development.