Re: [boost] [smart_ptr] marking shared_ptr_move_test known failure

From: Boris Gubenko (Boris.Gubenko_at_[hidden])
Date: 2007-06-28 13:41:49

Peter Dimov wrote:
> [...] In fact you can even mark it a known failure for any compiler since
> this is probably going to be the right default for new toolsets for quite
> a while.

You mean "<toolset name="*"/> so it unexpectedly passes on gcc-4.3.0_c++0x ?

Thanks,
  Boris

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Peter Dimov" <pdimov_at_[hidden]>
To: <boost_at_[hidden]>
Cc: "Boris Gubenko" <Boris.Gubenko_at_[hidden]>
Sent: Thursday, June 28, 2007 1:11 PM
Subject: Re: [boost] [smart_ptr] marking shared_ptr_move_test known failure

> Boris Gubenko wrote:
>> smart_ptr library test shared_ptr_move_test assumes the compiler
>> support
>> for rvalue references. The only platform participating in HEAD
>> testing it compiles on is gcc-4.3.0_c++0x.
>>
>> I'd like to mark this test known failure for all the platforms in HEAD
>> where it fails to compile because of the lack of the compiler support
>> for rvalue references. Any objections?
>
> None. In fact you can even mark it a known failure for any compiler since
> this is probably going to be the right default for new toolsets for quite a
> while.
>
> _______________________________________________
> Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost
>
>