From: Jeff Garland (jeff_at_[hidden])
Date: 2005-05-31 21:00:26
On Tue, 31 May 2005 11:38:09 -0700, Victor A. Wagner Jr. wrote
> Since we seem to be getting close (date anyone?) to the release of
> 1.33, I've changed my testing cycle to 8 times a day to improve
> turnaround for the library authors.
Thx -- that's very helpful -- hope the backend processing can keep up!
> The only remaining failures in
> VC-8_0 are some datetime things (the localtime test is clearly a
> deliberate choice on someone's part to make dates before 1970
> "illegal"). Are there any representatives from either Microsoft or
These are just warnings, you'll note that the test compiles and runs -- until
it blows up like the others...
> Dinkumware here who can explain this decision? Should we mark them
> as "expected failures" (though I'd object to having the block turn
> green simply because _I_ beileve it is an error and should show up
> as such)
I investigated this. What they've done is deprecated the standard interface
because of 'security issues' and invented a new one that is 'safer'. However,
there may be some cost in terms of speed. In any case, I was reluctant to
move away from the standard interface just for this compiler at the last
minute before a release. BTW, I'm pretty sure this happened in the last beta
upgrade b/c I don't remember seeing this b/f.
> the two "input facet" test failures show only:
> Run output [2005-05-31 17:13:49 UTC]:
> EXIT STATUS: 666
> not a lot of information for chasing down the actual problem.
Yeah -- I put some debugging code in but to no avail. Any chance you could
trap it in the debugger and send me a stack trace? I didn't pay much
attention earlier since when Carl was running with VC8 for awhile this was all
passing on his machine...
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk