From: Beman Dawes (bdawes_at_[hidden])
Date: 2003-07-12 16:10:01
At 05:47 AM 7/12/2003, Daniel Frey wrote:
>PS: Would it make sense to have a "boost bug bashing week" or something
>to fix some more bugs/regressions? Or do we wait for users to complain
>and provide fixes?
Until recently, figuring out which tests should pass for each compiler was
difficult. Sometimes a problem was a compiler bug, sometimes a bug in boost
code, and sometimes a configuration problem.
That is changing. On Win32 we now have several compilers which are good
enough that either all tests should pass, or all tests should pass except
for a very few where the compiler supplier has acknowledged a compiler bug.
So for the next release we can talk about explicit release criteria.
Meeting those criteria will in effect be a "boost bug bashing week". It may
go on for a bit longer than that, however:-)
But right now a lot of Boost developers are coping with interface changes
in Boost.Random and iterator adaptors. We need to keep focused on those
fixes until the dust starts to clear a bit.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk