Re: [boost] Re: Remaining GCC failures

From: Beman Dawes (bdawes_at_[hidden])
Date: 2004-01-01 20:16:58

At 01:53 PM 1/1/2004, David Abrahams wrote:
 >Beman Dawes <bdawes_at_[hidden]> writes:
 >
 >> As far as the Boost regression tests go, there hasn't be a lot of
 >> progress with GCC. The same Boost tests have been failing for the last
 >> four or five GCC releases, regardless of operating system.
 >>
 >> This sounds to me as if the Boost developers must think the problems
 >> lie with GCC (or just plain aren't paying attention), while the GCC
 >> folks think the problems lie with Boost (or just plain aren't paying
 >> attention).
 >>
 >> Someone needs to step forward and break the log-jam. File bug reports,
 >> email developers, and make sure someone is actively working on each
 >> issue. I've been doing that with Intel, Metrowerks, and Microsoft and
 >> it does work, typically resulting in fixes for both Boost and compiler
 >> (or occasionally std library) code.
 >>
 >> Any volunteers for GCC?
 >
 >Don't we know the maintainers for each of the libraries with
 >failures?  Can't we ask them directly?

We can certainly try.

The failures for the Win32 cgg 3.3.1 tests are:

   date_time/testmicrosec_time_clock
   iterator/interoperable_fail
   math/octonion_test
   math/quaternion_test
   regex/ 9 failures (runtime crashes)
   test/errors_handling_test (runtime crash)
   type_traits/tricky_is_enum_test

Boost developers for those libraries please report the bugs to 
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/

It wouldn't surprise me if the errors_handling_test and regex failures are 
a Boost problem with Boost.Test, or at least a problems that are being 
worsened by the Boost.Test problem. But Gennadiy is (1) on vacation, and 
(2)  says he needs help with gcc, which he isn't familiar with.

--Beman