From: John Maddock (john_at_[hidden])
Date: 2006-07-08 11:53:57
Peter Dimov wrote:
>> The only difference between this test and the "non-tricky" one is the
>> presence of those two lines. The test is intentionally pedantic.
> It didn't occur to me to look at the non-tricky test. :-)
> Why did you decide to duplicate all non-tricky portions in the tricky
> as well? We are running both.
Well originally they weren't supposed to be tricky: there was supposed to be
one test that "concept checked" each TR1 section, when I found that Boost
didn't support a few of the features, I just commented out those parts that
Boost didn't support and made these the "non-tricky" tests, and the
"complete" unmolested versions became the "tricky" tests.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk