[boost] Re: Expected Errors?

From: David Abrahams (dave_at_[hidden])
Date: 2003-11-30 10:53:41

Misha Bergal <mbergal_at_[hidden]> writes:

> David Abrahams <dave_at_[hidden]> writes:
>
>> How do I note that certain tests are expected to fail on a particular
>> compiler?
>>
>
> To annotate failures in metacomm reports edit file
> status/explicit-failures-markup.xml. I think the format is
> self-explanatory. 

OK, thanks!

> The mark will change the color of the fail cell from
> red/yellow to green - the note will be displayed in the front of the
> test related output when you follow the "fail" link.

That's great!

I think it might be helpful for users if there were a color which
indicates degraded, but still-mostly-working, functionality.  Sort of,
"this library basically works, but see the failure log for corner
cases", as opposed to "we expect this to fail and it's been reported
to the compiler vendor, but it mostly makes the library unusable".
I'm not sure if we have any of the latter type of failure, so if we
don't I guess there's not much value in adding a color.  I also
realize it's a qualitative judgement which you could argue we should
let users make.  It seems to me, however, that a failure of things
like is_convertible_fail_test in the iterators library cause only a
tiny degradation in capability ought to be distinguished from more
serious problems somehow.

Comments?

-- 
Dave Abrahams
Boost Consulting
www.boost-consulting.com