From: Douglas Gregor (gregod_at_[hidden])
Date: 2002-02-08 16:04:57
On Friday 08 February 2002 03:38 pm, you wrote:
> The Dashboard seems very promising, but it needs results from many
> more compilers to be even more useful. I also can't find preprocessor
> tests on the dashboard.
More platforms/compilers will come as we stabilize the Jam/Dart regression
testing code, and we'll eventually ask for regression testing help from
anyone and everyone with a compiler. As for the preprocessor tests, most of
them are being run already (except for for_test.cpp and list_test.cpp, which
I'll add soon). However, they don't show up because they are compile-only
tests. This was a grueling decision to make, and I'd love to hear more input.
There are two ways to handle compile-only testcases:
1) Just compile the object files along with building the rest of Boost.
Pro: if there are errors, they show up in the "errors" list highlighted by
Dart. Con: don't show up in the list of tests.
2) Perform the compilation of these object files separately, and the
compiler output becomes the test output. Pro: they show up on the test list
on the dashboard. Con: they don't show up in the "errors" list.
We chose #1, but I'm beginning to think we were wrong to do so.
> During the last release, for instance, I didn't know that
> libs/preprocessor/test/list_test.cpp didn't pass on CodeWarrior. I
> can't test on CodeWarrior frequently. The fix was trivial, and I
> committed it earlier today, but it isn't in the current release.
I understand your pain. Fixing bugs for a compiler you don't have access to
is nearly impossible without a reasonable bound on the "hey let's try
this, nope different error" cycle time.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk