From: Gennaro Prota (gennaro_prota_at_[hidden])
Date: 2006-07-31 15:34:52
On Mon, 31 Jul 2006 14:11:58 -0500, Aleksey Gurtovoy
>Gennaro Prota writes:
>> About the regression test mess, dynamic_bitset is not listed in the
>> report, but has some "red" failures
>A "red" failure indicates a regression from the last-known-good
>release, whether the toolset is marked as required or not, so it's
>perfectly normal to have these present on the library's page and
>absent from the Issues page.
Ok. I realized this afterwards.
>> on compilers which I don't think were tested before (which I've
>> discovered by chance);
>Which compilers, and why do you think they weren't tested before?
Not sure, but I don't remember dynamic_bitset<> being regression
tested on CW 8.3.
>> and cases where the same compiler passes or not depending on the
>> test runner (e.g. VC7).
>That happens, and when it does, it needs investigation.
Aleksey, regression tests really need some attention. I understand
that they are provided as a courtesy, that they don't come for free
and all that, but definitely they need attention. I've just fixed a
hardcoded cvs repository link which still referred to the old cvsroot,
so that no link to source files actually worked. That's alarming, and
it's not the test runner's fault: it either means no one follows the
links or they give for granted that they do not work. Both are bad
-- [ Gennaro Prota, C++ developer for hire ]
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk