From: David Abrahams (dave_at_[hidden])
Date: 2004-09-23 12:19:20
Aleksey Gurtovoy <agurtovoy_at_[hidden]> writes:
> David Abrahams writes:
>> Aleksey Gurtovoy <agurtovoy_at_[hidden]> writes:
>>> David Abrahams writes:
>>>> Aleksey Gurtovoy <agurtovoy_at_[hidden]> writes:
>>>>> Should we mark Boost.Python as unusable with gcc 2.95.3/Intel 7.1-8.0
>>>>> on Linux? The number of failures for these looks unhealthy --
>>>> Well, no, we should fix whatever is causing the regressions.
>>> What regressions are you referring to? Everything besides
>>> "data_members" has been failing in 1.31 as well. I was talking about
>>> green/yellow failures -- about 1/3 of the tests fail; is the library
>>> still usable in this state?
>> Oh, I understand.
>> The problems with gcc-2 only occur when C++ exceptions are thrown and
>> the framework catches them, which happens quite often in those
>> tests. So technically gcc-2 is usable if you're careful.
> OK. Does that imply that somebody is going to look into fixing
> "data_members" regression with gcc-2.95.3-linux*
It's inconcievable to me that it could have passed in 1.31.0, since
this is part of the test (which hasn't changed):
>>> try: x.x = 77
... except AttributeError: pass
... else: print 'no error'
So I don't think a fix is possible or practical.
On second thought, let me try something; maybe something simple can be done
about the majority of these failures.
-- Dave Abrahams Boost Consulting http://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