From: David Abrahams (dave_at_[hidden])
Date: 2002-10-08 07:09:01
"John Maddock" <jm_at_[hidden]> writes:
> > > 1) Should we use boost.test?
> > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> > >
> > > As it stands IMO no: the tests are both compile time and run time tests,
> > > yes this really does make a difference (gory details and compiler bugs
> > > omitted here...).
> > Not obvious to me why, without the gories.
> OK here are some of the gory details:
OK, I understand all of that. Thanks for the explanation.
> > > In particular the compiler requirements column is now almost
> > > meaningless. The thing is we now have so many fixes checked in that
> > > most of the traits work most of the time with most compilers. I
> > > guess we could remove the PCD legends and replace with comments
> > > containing broad generalisations.
> > I think that the category "requires compiler support" is still
> > useful. However, there are cases where a trait is not an atom, but
> > composed of other traits which need compiler support. In those cases,
> > it's very helpful to know that you just need to just need to
> > specialize the atomic traits in order to make the others work.
> Good point, but doesn't the dependency tree vary depending upon the
I don't know. I hope not. I mean, "requires compiler support" should
mean that even with a perfectly conforming compiler we can't implement
it, today. Shouldn't all non-atomic traits requiring compiler support
have the same implementation on all compilers?
> All good points, and all lot of work!
I don't think it would be too bad, especially now that they're
1. We make a list of all the things we think it's important to
say/know about a trait.
2. We check that in as the first piece of documentation, like a
3. We treat each trait individually. Maybe each should have its own
web page for detailed info. We just look at the implementation and
the test results for each one.
-- David Abrahams * Boost Consulting dave_at_[hidden] * http://www.boost-consulting.com
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk