Boost logo

Boost :

From: Daniel James (daniel_at_[hidden])
Date: 2005-09-18 04:38:07

Markus Schöpflin wrote:
> As can be seen at there is a failure for a very
> specific test of the hash function on Tru64/cxx65-042.
> I finally took the time to track this down and it turned out to be due to a
> bogus return value of std::numeric_limits<long double>::denorm_min().
> The good news is that it's fixed in the latest compiler release. But should
> the failure be marked as expected for older versions of the compiler, or
> should a workaround be added to the test itself? Any preferences?

Thanks for looking into this. I think I'd go for the workaround - as the
library itself isn't failing. Can you let me know the version number
which works? Or feel free to make the change yourself, if you prefer.


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