From: David Abrahams (dave_at_[hidden])
Date: 2004-02-12 18:10:47
Martin Wille <mw8329_at_[hidden]> writes:
>>>2. Some tests are known to fail for certain compilers.
>>> If those tests are joined with other tests then we'll
>>> lose information about these other tests.
>> If it runtime errors you could rely on "expected errors"
>> feature. You are right for compile time errors, though one could
>> try to ifdef part of test program.
> I think #ifdeffing around known failures would already
> help with the existing tests.
The problem is that the tests would "appear" to work to people looking
at the regression logs, and if in fact they ever did start working,
we'll never know that the tests can be re-enabled.
> However, I'd prefer those compiler version checks to be in the build
Could you be more specific?
-- Dave Abrahams Boost Consulting www.boost-consulting.com
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk