KmTest VS ut

Compare KmTest vs ut and see what are their differences.


Kernel-mode C++ unit testing framework in BDD-style (by SergiusTheBest)
Our great sponsors
  • SonarCloud - Analyze your C and C++ projects with just one click.
  • Revelo Payroll - Free Global Payroll designed for tech teams
  • Onboard AI - Learn any GitHub repo in 59 seconds
  • InfluxDB - Collect and Analyze Billions of Data Points in Real Time
KmTest ut
0 10
46 1,080
- 0.8%
0.0 0.0
about 1 month ago 10 days ago
C++ C++
Mozilla Public License 2.0 Boost Software License 1.0
The number of mentions indicates the total number of mentions that we've tracked plus the number of user suggested alternatives.
Stars - the number of stars that a project has on GitHub. Growth - month over month growth in stars.
Activity is a relative number indicating how actively a project is being developed. Recent commits have higher weight than older ones.
For example, an activity of 9.0 indicates that a project is amongst the top 10% of the most actively developed projects that we are tracking.


Posts with mentions or reviews of KmTest. We have used some of these posts to build our list of alternatives and similar projects.

We haven't tracked posts mentioning KmTest yet.
Tracking mentions began in Dec 2020.


Posts with mentions or reviews of ut. We have used some of these posts to build our list of alternatives and similar projects. The last one was on 2023-04-10.
  • [C++20][safety] static_assert is all you need (no leaks, no UB)
    3 projects | /r/cpp | 10 Apr 2023
    I don't think stepping through static_assert is a thing? Curious if it is, though. Since constexpr is either run-time or compile-time and static_assert is not a poor man's debugging facility could be to -Dstatic_assert(...) assert(__VA_ARGS__) and gdb the code. Alternatively, a more refined solution would be to use an UT framework (for example which helps with that. IMHO, TDD can also limit the requirement of stepping into the code and with gurantees that the code is memory safe and UB safe there is less need for sanitizers and valgrind etc. depending on the coverage.
  • snatch -- A lightweight C++20 testing framework
    5 projects | /r/cpp | 18 Oct 2022
    Have you compared with Boost UT, or was this targeted at keeping things catch2-like?
    5 projects | /r/cpp | 18 Oct 2022
    It was not easy, I had to modify Boost UT to get it to run my tests. It doesn't support type-parametrized tests when the type parameter is non-copiable, which was the case for me. This is a symptom of a larger issue, which is that it relies on std::apply and std::tuple to generate the type-parametrized tests, which in turns requires instantiating the tuple and the contained objects (even though these instances aren't actually used; eh). That's a no go for me, since I need to carefully monitor when instance are created, and this was throwing off my test code. I had to effectively disable these checks to get it to run without failures. Then there was a similar issue with expect(), which doesn't work if part of the expression is non-copiable. I reported these issues to them.
  • [C++20] New way of meta-programming?
    5 projects | /r/cpp | 5 Sep 2022 (for better user interface when defining tests without macros)
  • Getting started with Boost in 2022
    5 projects | /r/cpp | 14 Apr 2022 from Kris Jusiak is worth checking
  • How to unit test
    8 projects | /r/cpp_questions | 9 Feb 2022
  • Calculate Your Code Performance
    5 projects | | 23 Oct 2021
    C++: C++ has quite a number of benchmarking libraries some of the recent ones involving C++ 20's flexibility. The most notable being Google Bench and UT. C does not have many specific benchmarking libraries, but you can easily integrate C code with C++ benchmarking libraries in order to test the performance of your C code.
  • Benchmarking Code
    6 projects | | 19 Oct 2021
  • Another C++ unit testing framework without macros
    6 projects | /r/cpp | 16 Apr 2021
    By Boost.UI you mean this?
    6 projects | /r/cpp | 16 Apr 2021
    In Boost.UT there is a number of different styles to add a parametrized test case. All of them are pretty cryptic bue to heavy isage of oeverloaded operators of custom "non-public" classes. Except for the for-loop method, in all other methods the list of parameter values goes after the test procedure definition. I find this inconvenient, as I want to see list of parameter value next to the test name. This is what I used to from the times I was coding a lot of unit tests in C#.

What are some alternatives?

When comparing KmTest and ut you can also consider the following projects:

Boost.Test - The reference C++ unit testing framework (TDD, xUnit, C++03/11/14/17)

upp11 - C++11 lightweight single header unit test framework

Minctest - tiny unit testing framework for ANSI C

trompeloeil - Header only C++14 mocking framework

FakeIt - C++ mocking made easy. A simple yet very expressive, headers only library for c++ mocking.

Catch - A modern, C++-native, test framework for unit-tests, TDD and BDD - using C++14, C++17 and later (C++11 support is in v2.x branch, and C++03 on the Catch1.x branch)


doctest - The fastest feature-rich C++11/14/17/20/23 single-header testing framework

test - Write unit and fuzz tests for Elm code.

orbit - C/C++ Performance Profiler

GUnit - GUnit - Google.Test/Google.Mock/Cucumber on steroids