Re: [boost] tr1/test_function_tricky trickier than needed

From: Peter Dimov (pdimov_at_[hidden])
Date: 2006-07-08 11:14:03

John Maddock wrote:

>> I think that these two lines need to be moved to a separate test.
>
> The only difference between this test and the "non-tricky" one is the
> presence of those two lines.  The test is intentionally pedantic.

It didn't occur to me to look at the non-tricky test. :-)

Why did you decide to duplicate all non-tricky portions in the tricky test 
as well? We are running both.