From: Aleksey Gurtovoy (agurtovoy_at_[hidden])
Date: 2004-07-31 06:41:31
Vladimir Prus writes:
> Jeff Garland wrote:
>> Looking at the boost-wide reports today, testmicrosec_time_clock is
>> marked as failing red on a whole series of compilers. However,
>> they should be 'green' (and have been in past reports) as they have
>> been explicitly marked as failing:
> I noted the same thing.
> has only a couple of yellow cells and boost-wide reports have a huge
> number of yellow ones.
There *was* a configuration problem with Boost-wide reports that did
lead to a stale markup, but in general the comparison above (or at
least the wording) is not valid -- there are more platforms in the
Boost-wide reports than in any platform-specific ones, and therefore
counting overall number of cells of a particular color doesn't make
> While we're at it, I have two questions about boost-wide regression
> 1. How they are related with individual reports? Are they generated from
> individual reports.
They are generated from the same logs, yes.
> 2. Old style reports showed warnings, for example see:
> New style reports do not. I find it not very good. I'd really want
> boost to be warning-free on gcc 3.4 and fixed some errors
> already. But I'm not sure the above page is up-to-date, and it's
> hard to search for warning in it. Maybe, new style reports could
> show warnings too?
Put on the TODO list.
-- Aleksey Gurtovoy MetaCommunications Engineering
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk