From: Gennadiy Rozental (rogeeff_at_[hidden])
Date: 2007-10-18 17:45:43
"John Maddock" <john_at_[hidden]> wrote in message
> Gennadiy Rozental wrote:
>>> My gut feeling is that this is the wrong moment to introduce a
>>> breaking change like this, especially as you're changing the
>>> compiler's default behaviour. Given enough time it's
>>> work-aroundable, but it's time I'd rather
>>> not spend just at present, and besides I would expect this to break
>>> libraries like random and interval as well. If you want to make
>>> this an option for Boost.Test that's fine, it's making this the
>>> default in the run up to a release that I'm not happy with.
>> Ok. How about if I make this optional and disabled by default for
>> now. But make it enabled by default after 1.35?
> I'd say disabled for now, then ask and see what users want after 1.35 :-)
Ok. I've made it optional and default to false. There a command line
argument --detect_fp_exceptions=[yes|no] to manage the behavior.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk