OK - no problem from me on this.
As far as testing process_jam_logs goes -- would you mind
telling
what's missing in the current output? Basically, an easy way
to
test your changes is to run old process_jam_logs, run new
process_jam_logs,
and make sure that the produced xml files are
identical.
Well used the latest release version
1.34.1. I'll check again.
As far as library_status.cpp
goes, I've just looked at SVN at it
appears that file has large blocks of
code common to compiler_status.cpp.
Except that it was reformatted to use
different indentation, which makes
it impossible to understand the real
differences. I don't think this
code duplication is OK.
I considered it an enhancement of compiler_status
but I didn't want to step
on someone elses baby. Note that the output
is NOT the same. Its too
big to attach here, but you can see it at
You'll notice that it displays all tested
combinations of variants, linkage,
theading, in one table. Compiler status
shows only one set - regardless
of how many variations have been tested.
The boost regression tests
I believe only test debug and some default build
combinations. This is
not enough for me. Also note that this
table has less rows than the
one in boost regression testing since can show
both shared and static
versions of the tests in different columns of the
same table. The header
of the columns reflects the structure of the
tests in the bin.v2 directory.
Speaking about
compiler_status.cpp, what you say is false. Here's what I've
just
did:
cd
.../libs/program_options/test
bjam --dump-tests -d+2 > log
2>&1
cat log |
process_jam_log --v2
compiler_status --v2 /home/ghost/Work/Boost/boost-svn status.html
status-links.html
I tested the release version - but still I may
have made a mistake - i'll check again.
Robert Ramey
_______________________________________________
Unsubscribe &
other changes:
http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost-build