From: Terje Slettebø (tslettebo_at_[hidden])
Date: 2003-03-18 18:49:21
>From: "Terje Slettebø" <tslettebo_at_[hidden]>
> >From: "Rozental, Gennadiy" <gennadiy.rozental_at_[hidden]>
> > > If these are omitted for g++ 2.95.x, all tests pass for that compiler.
> > > However, as it compiles without errors on both MSVC 6 and g++
> > > 2.95.x, maybe
> > > one shouldn't have any BOOST_WORKAROUND's in the test code?
> > >
> > > That will make it show up as failing on MSVC 6 and g++
> > > 2.95.x, even though
> > > it passes almost all the enabled tests on both.
> > You could use expected failures feature of Boost.Test
> Aha. That could be an odd test, though
Sorry, I misunderstood. I thought it was testing for failure, when I
realised that "expected failures" is something else, in the framework. Yes,
using it could be a possibility. It seems just right for the task.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk