Boost logo

Boost :

From: Jeremy Siek (jsiek_at_[hidden])
Date: 2002-01-23 21:57:32

Actually, just having the expected number is not very accurate... what if
by some freak accident an expected failure turns into a success while at
the same time a usually successful test starts to fail. The number of
failures will stay the same, telling us nothing about the problems that
are occuring. It would be much better to have a specific list of the tests
that are expected to fail.

On Thu, 24 Jan 2002, rogeeff wrote:
rogeef> New Test Library present mechanism for defining expected number of
rogeef> failures. You still need to set appropriate value for each compiler.
rogeef> Gennadiy.

 Jeremy Siek
 Ph.D. Student, Indiana Univ. B'ton email: jsiek_at_[hidden]
 C++ Booster ( office phone: (812) 855-3608

Boost list run by bdawes at, gregod at, cpdaniel at, john at