Re: [boost] Re: 1.31.0 regressions

From: Aleksey Gurtovoy (agurtovoy_at_[hidden])
Date: 2004-02-12 23:50:17

David Abrahams writes:
> I agree that egregiously long build times for a test make it
> prohibitive; those tests need to be fixed.  That has been a particular
> problem with the random library for at least a year and a half.  
>
> We could also go back to an arrangement in which only outdated tests
> get run again, so tests that failed last time but for which no
> dependencies changed wouldn't run again.

Please! Similarly, for "clean" runs, implementing Martin's suggestion
would make a _huge_ difference:

Martin Wille writes:
> 2. Not compiling/running tests which are expected to
>     fail. We have a mechanism to mark toolsets unsupported
>     for certain libraries. However, this markup is applied
>     _after_ trying to compile/run the tests. If the
>     build system wouldn't even try to run the tests for
>     unsupported toolsets then this would also speed up
>     a test cycle.
>

-- 
Aleksey Gurtovoy
MetaCommunications Engineering