From: Beman Dawes (bdawes_at_[hidden])
Date: 2004-02-15 22:23:51
At 11:18 PM 2/12/2004, David Abrahams wrote:
>Beman Dawes <bdawes_at_[hidden]> writes:
>> >3. Compile time may become very large for large test
>> > programs or heavy template usage. E.g. in one case,
>> > we had to split a test into three (Spirit's switch_p
>> > tests) in order to make testing feasible.
>> It is hard to know the overall effect without accurate timings. My
>> personal belief is that on average the total time will drop. But we
>> need timings to know for sure.
>I still can't understand why we're focused on reducing testing time.
The longer the tests take, the fewer times they can be cycled.
That is a particular problem as a release nears. The release manager often
has to delay some action pending the outcome of tests. Not a problem if the
tests run quickly and cycle often. But when a test cycle takes 2 1/2 to 3
hours, as was common during the runup for 1.31.0, it adds days to the time
it takes to finish a release.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk