From: Jeremy Siek (jsiek_at_[hidden])
Date: 2004-02-12 11:35:52
On Feb 12, 2004, at 8:30 AM, David Abrahams wrote:
> I'm really unconvinced that we need smaller tests on fewer compilers.
> Human monitoring is just too error-prone. Why risk it? Why not have
> comprehensive tests with automated notifications when something
> breaks? It seems to me that less testing can only result in fewer
> things working, and coupled with human monitoring it's just going to
> make things worse, not better.
This sounds like the right direction to go in.
Jeremy Siek <jsiek_at_[hidden]>
Ph.D. Student, Indiana University Bloomington
C++ Booster (http://www.boost.org)
Office phone: (812) 856-1820
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk