From: David Abrahams (dave_at_[hidden])
Date: 2005-09-13 12:49:36
Doug Gregor <dgregor_at_[hidden]> writes:
> This test is failing on a whole lot of compilers. For instance, see:
> Actually, a quick review shows that it fails on every compiler out
> there :) Normally, I'd blame the test itself, but given that this test
> was meticulously crafted to poke at the corner cases of STL
> implementations, it's very likely that the test is correct. Would
> someone volunteer to check out the errors and mark failures in
> explicit-failures-markup.xml appropriately?
Last week as Matthias Troyer and I were preparing slides for a class,
we decided to try out one of the examples from the test. It turned
out that the test wasn't in the test suite.
Here's an excerpt of a chat with Jeremy:
boostdave: Hi, J!
jeremysiek: Hi Dave!
jeremysiek: Are you in Switzerland?
boostdave: You bet! Matthias just found a problem with the concept
jeremysiek: cool (about being in Switzerland, not the problem!)
boostdave: Yes, very. --- The stl_coverage test is invoked in
boostdave: However, status/Jamfile just goes on running the other
concept_check tests and never subincludes the Jamfile
boostdave: The coverage test is failing for matthias when he tries to run it.
boostdave: Do you want me to fix status/Jamfile so you start getting
error reports? ;-)
jeremysiek: so yeah, thanks for offering to fix the Jamfile
boostdave: OK. It's going on the release branch too, since after all
this is the time to fix bugs for the point release.
jeremysiek: just one thing to note, stl_concept_covering.cpp is more
of a test of the C++ implementation than of the concept
jeremysiek: so often failures are expected
boostdave: Unless you got a bug in your archetype.
jeremysiek: or a bug in the test itself
boostdave: But anyway, you can just mark the explicit failures markup
boostdave: and then report the bug to GCC ;-)
-- Dave Abrahams Boost Consulting www.boost-consulting.com