From: Martin Bonner (Martin.Bonner_at_[hidden])
Date: 2007-04-04 12:56:41
[mailto:boost-bounces_at_[hidden]] On Behalf Of Richard Smith Sent:
04 April 2007 16:48 To: Vladimir Prus
Subject: Re: [boost] [optional] New RC_1_34_0 regression
> Vladimir Prus wrote:
>> Previously, we decided on this list that on a certain date, all
>> remaining failures will be marked as expected.
> Freeze was scheduled to be at 11:00 UTC on Mar 2nd; the
> regression was only introduced at 23:08 UTC on Mar 1st. And
> the file in question (<boost/none.hpp>) has been modified
> twice since then to fix other regressions introduced
> by that commit.
> Don't get me wrong -- I'm not against that commit having
> gone in at the last minute -- other parts of the commit
> fixed several important issues, but it seems unreasonable to
> expect any problems with it to have been fixed in the twelve
> hours between commit and freeze. And indeed the file in
> question has been edited in the last week to fix other
>> Now, you're pointing out that
>> we have a regression, for which we don't even have a test.
> Yes you do. The patch I attached to my email this morning
> added a test to the test suite.
>> In light of that decision, we probably can add a test for that
>> problem, and immediately mark all failures of said test as expected.
>> But that would not be very helpful. I don't think we should give
>> this problem
>> any bonus points just because it's not discovered by the tests yet.
> Indeed, and I'm not suggesting it should. But if the test
> suites were indiciating a failure that would silently change
> legitimate user code across all platforms, I would hope that
> too would be fixed rather than marked 'expected'.
> Unsubscribe & other changes:
-- Martin Bonner Project Leader PI SHURLOK LTD Telephone: +44 1223 441434 / 203894 (direct) Fax: +44 1223 203999 Email: martin.bonner_at_[hidden] www.pi-shurlok.com
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk