Fwd: Re: Boost.Threads and Regression Testing

From: bill_kempf (williamkempf_at_[hidden])
Date: 2002-02-27 15:39:34

--- In jamboost_at_y..., "David Abrahams" <david.abrahams_at_r...> wrote:
> > The documentation mentions this in a few different places.
> 
> In no case does the documentation use this form in the requirements 
section
> of a target description. Requirements are meant to be constraints. 
What does
> it mean to "require" static/dynamic?

Ah... I see. Disconnect on my part. It's in the build section, not 
the requirements section.

> > OK, but for builds the <runtime-link>static/dynamic *IS* currently
> > documented as the correct way to do this, and it would be better 
if
> > the two behaved in the same manner here.
> 
> We're talking at cross-purposes. Does separating the idea of 
requirements
> from the idea of a build-request clear things up at all?

Yes. Now I guess the point (beyond the link bug in the build system 
for <dll>) is that I think a build section/rule variable should be 
included in the regression tests. It's important that I be able to 
insure the various subvariants compile, link, and pass runtime 
tests. This will become more important if I can turn pthread-win32 
support into a variant on Windows platforms.

Bill Kempf