From: Thorsten Ottosen (thorsten.ottosen_at_[hidden])
Date: 2006-05-03 17:54:23
Thomas Witt wrote:
> The following libraries show fails across almost all platforms in the
> 1.34 regression tests
For hp_cxx- 65_042_tru64, all tests seems to crash the compiler. So
I should mark this unuable.
For sun-5.8, some of it could probably be imrpoved if somebody has time.
I think that in general the library is usable, the major problems seems
to be partual ordering of overloads of insert() and transfer(). As long
as those functions are not called, it should work. I should mark this
usable with a conservative interface.
VC7: needs wok by someone. I will mark it unusable.
Borland: not much have happened in the new compilers. I'll mark them
Digital Mars: there still major problem with the test library which
prevent us from getting any real result for this compiler. Should it be
marked unusable anyway?
CW 9.*. The library is large usable. This compiler has problems with
auto_ptr and range-based overloads, but the core of the library compiled
Apart from that, there are some minor GCC bugs that needs to be
fixed...I can probably manage that.
As a general remark, I'm fairly unhappy with the fact that boost.test
causes quite a few other regressions to fail. If there is one component
that *needs* to be consertive/portable, it is the test library.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk