Boost logo

Boost :

From: Jonathan Turkanis (technews_at_[hidden])
Date: 2004-08-22 11:31:13

"David Abrahams" <dave_at_[hidden]> wrote in message
> "Jonathan Turkanis" <technews_at_[hidden]> writes:
> > "David Abrahams" <dave_at_[hidden]> wrote in message
> >
> >
> >> Doesn't Walter update DMC++ quite often?
> >
> > Yes, but there are lots of bugs on his list ;-)
> >
> >> Would it be better to just
> >> report bugs to him and wait for the fixes?
> >
> > Walter seems to be very conscientious about bug reports, but I
> > think you can assume that if you report a bug it will be fixed in
> > matter of weeks.
> >
> >> I have no major objection
> >> to the patches; I'm just slightly concerned about crufting up the
> >> codebase to add support for a previously unsupported compiler if
> >> will happen without changes in a few weeks anyway.
> >
> > I'd like to see boost support DMC soon. IMO, the best way to
> > Walter to fix the bugs which most affect boost is to run and
> > the regression tests for DMC.
> But if we cover all the bugs up with workarounds he'll never see any
> problems.

Daniel said his fixes don't make DMC pass all the tests. So presumably
there'll still be faiulres to point out.

> > (I have a feeling I'm about to be asked
> > to volunteer :-) ) I tend to think he'll be more motivated if DMC
> > passes, say, 42% of the tests than if it passes 0-5%. In the
> > case, judging by his reaction when preprocessor problems were
> > to him earlier this year, I think he might conclude that the
> > must be with boost. (After all, DMC can't be *that* bad.)
> Wow, that's pretty arrogant.

I didn't mean to imply he was arrogant. I said he 'very conscientious
about bug reports'. But his *initial* reaction, when Dan Watkins
reported proprocessor trouble to him either late last year, was that
boost must have been expecting too much of the preprocessor. Later I
(with limited knowledge of the preprocessor) gave him some short
examples of code which the DMC preprocessor handled incorrectly, and
he eventually fixed it. I believe Paul Mensonides did the same. But it
turned out the problems with the DMC preprocessor ran very deep.

> If he has that attitude, Boost test
> failure reports aren't going to make any difference.

I've carried on some brief email correspondence with him, and I've
followed the DMC lists. I think he understandably likes to focus his
attention on bugs that directly affect his existing users. So I can
understand why he wouldn't be very motivated to start fixing a huge
list of bugs if only 5% of the boost regressions pass. He'd be
spending energy on fixes which wouldn't necessarily help any users in
the immediate future.

> > So I'd like to see patches committed if they give substantial
> > of boost some hope of compiling with DMC.
> >
> > But this is idle speculation.
> Hum. Maybe you should ask Walter what he's going to be responsive

Like I said, I've discussed this with him a bit. Of course, more
discussion would be a good idea. But my impression is that if we just
report bugs and wait for Walter to fix them it will be a long time
before substantial parts of boost work.


Boost list run by bdawes at, gregod at, cpdaniel at, john at