From: Markus Schöpflin (markus.schoepflin_at_[hidden])
Date: 2005-09-19 04:07:19
Daniel James wrote:
> Markus Schöpflin wrote:
>> 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
> 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.
I checked in a workaround for the test on the RC branch.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk