From: Aleksey Gurtovoy (agurtovoy_at_[hidden])
Date: 2003-12-07 23:08:24
Douglas Gregor wrote:
> I'm picking through the Win32 regression test results to see where
> we stand. Here are some concerns I have (on a per-library basis):
> MPL: Untested (?)
Tested by us - http://tinyurl.com/t88o.
> Multi-array: Totally broken on Borland; I think we can work around
> this, though.
> numeric/interval: Broken on Borland (looks like a standard library
> bug); Broken on MSVC 6.0 (looks like it thinks float/double are
> numeric/ublas: Failures on CodeWarrior 8.3; I _think_ that the line
> it's pointing out is missing a "typename" (there are other
> occurrences of the same construct).
> regex: Library build failure on CodeWarrior 8.3
> spirit: Untested (?)
Tested by us - http://tinyurl.com/y6rj.
> alignment_of_test/type_with_alignment_test on CodeWarrior 8.3: I
> can't make heads or tails of this. We compute the alignment of a
> pointer-to-member function one way and get 8; then compute it a
> different way and get 12. I haven't a clue which is right, but
> this is _strange_.
> remove_xxx: Borland fails most of these; is this a compiler
> limitation? MSVC 6.0 and 7.0 fail all of them (no partial
> specialization support), so I've noted this in win32-notes-map.txt.
> utility: enable_if_* tests fail on Borland, CW 8.3, MSVC 6.0, and
> MSVC 7.0; I've noted that they're all due to compiler bugs.
> In a perfect world, I'd love to see all of the tests either passing
> or noted as a compiler/platform/standard library bug for a release.
That was the release criteria for 1.30.2 (for major platforms we agreed
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk