[boost] Fw: [typeof] please make "*_native" tests expected failures on HP-UX

From: Boris Gubenko (Boris.Gubenko_at_[hidden])
Date: 2007-01-17 20:00:52

  I sent attached mail a week ago to boost_at_[hidden] list. Did not
  get any response. Perhaps, I should've sent it to boost testing list
  and/or provide a patch. This is what I'm doing now hoping, that it will
  help to resolve the issue. I also CC typeof library author (I hope, I
  have his correct mail address).

  The issue is that, like other compilers, including such EDG-based
  compilers as como-4_3_3-vc7_1 and cxx on Tru64, the HP-UX aCC6 compiler
  does not support typeof keyword in default mode (both cxx and aCC6
  support it in Gnu dialect mode). For toolsets using compilers that do not
  support typeof keyword, the "*_native" group of typeof library tests is
  marked expected failure (there are some 19 tests in this group). The
  patch below adds "acc" to the list of these toolsets. Please, apply it
  to CVS HEAD and the RC branch.

  Thanks,
    Boris

Index: explicit-failures-markup.xml
===================================================================
RCS file: /cvsroot/boost/boost/status/explicit-failures-markup.xml,v
retrieving revision 1.433.2.130
diff -r1.433.2.130 explicit-failures-markup.xml
2375a2376
>             <toolset name="acc"/>

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Boris Gubenko" <Boris.Gubenko_at_[hidden]>
To: <boost_at_[hidden]>
Cc: "Boris Gubenko" <Boris.Gubenko_at_[hidden]>
Sent: Thursday, January 11, 2007 7:29 PM
Subject: [typeof] please make "*_native" tests expected failures on HP-UX

> Like many other compilers, aCC6 on HP-UX does not support typeof extension
> (to be precise, it supports it in GNU C++ dialect compatibility mode --
> -Ag++ -- but not in the default mode).
> 
> In explicit-failures-markup.xml, there is a group of toolsets making
> "*_native" typeof library tests expected failures, with the remark: "Native
> mode is not supported for this compiler.". Please, add "acc" toolset to
> this group, in both HEAD and the RC branch.
> 
> I don't think that a patch is needed for such a simple change, but if you
> need/want a patch, I can provide one.
> 
> Thanks,
>  Boris
>