From: David Abrahams (dave_at_[hidden])
Date: 2007-05-04 19:49:54
on Fri May 04 2007, Stefan Seefeld <seefeld-AT-sympatico.ca> wrote:
> David Abrahams wrote:
>> Okay, here are some issues I think ought to be solved, in no
>> particular order, some (much) more important than others:
> I'm happy to see you bring up much the same points I mentioned.
> Here is one I haven't yet got to, and would like to explore a bit
>> * generating XML by parsing the jam log is fragile and prevents the
>> use of multiple build processes (-jN). This one should be almost
>> embarassingly easy to fix.
> I think there is more to this than only the ability to run tests in
> parallel. For example, it would help to robustify the testing
> harness if the 'test database' could be inspected without actually
> executing any test. By that I mean the ability to:
> * See all tests, as part of the test database structure (i.e. their
> organization into test suites)
> * See meta data associated with tests, such as
> - what kind of test
> - expected outcome, per platform
> - dependencies, prerequisites, etc.
How would that help with robustness?
-- Dave Abrahams Boost Consulting www.boost-consulting.com Don't Miss BoostCon 2007! ==> http://www.boostcon.com
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk