Re: [boost] [1.35.0] Test regressions

From: Robert Ramey (ramey_at_[hidden])
Date: 2008-03-19 13:42:47

Actually, this doesn't fix anything.

Since changes to binary archives where checked in, any archive classes
derived from this archive are no longer guarenteed to work.  Portable
archive is such a class.  In fact, the original intent of the example
was to illustrate how to make a new archive by deriving from an
existing one.  The changes to binary archive now render this example
incorrect and misleading.  I would not now recommend using binary
archive as a base class for this reason.

The new version of portable archive - recently
checked into the trunk - fixes this by not being based on binary archive
any more.  It's been tested to create portable archives - but its still
being checked out.

Unfortunately, this was not discovered until late in the developement cycle
and its not a trivial fix.  It ripples through the documentation.  And of
course, we need a new example to illustrate how best to do this.  And
this entails making a good example, and test and corresponding
documentation.  So its not a trivial fix.

The only fix at this point is to update the Introduction section to
include the information related above.

Robert

Doug Gregor wrote:
> On Mar 19, 2008, at 9:42 AM, Beman Dawes wrote:
>
>> For a full list of 1.35.0 test regressions, see
>> http://beta.boost.org/development/tests/release/developer/summary.html
>
> Or, better yet:
>
> http://beta.boost.org/development/tests/release/developer/issues.html
>
>> There are a few 1.35.0 regressions I'm not particularly concerned
>> about;  VC++ 7.1 is now old news, and no one seems to care much about
>> the Intel/Windows compiler.
>>
>> Given that VC++ 9.0 has been out for awhile now, it would be nice to
>> kill off a few more of those regressions before 1.35.0 ships:
>>
>> * Graph
>
> As Richard Webb noted, it fails for the same reason as VC++ 8.0 fails,
> so we should just mark this as "expected" as well. Okay for me to go
> ahead and do that on the trunk and release branch?
>
>> Red regressions I'm concerned about are:
>>
>> * Numeric/interval on Darwin.
>> * Serialization on Darwin.
>
> This is the trivial patch to fix the Serialization failures on Darwin:
>
> Index: libs/serialization/example/portable_binary_oarchive.hpp
> ===================================================================
> --- libs/serialization/example/portable_binary_oarchive.hpp (revision
> 43724)
> +++ libs/serialization/example/portable_binary_oarchive.hpp (working
> copy)
> @@ -52,7 +52,7 @@ public:
>      friend class
> boost::archive::basic_binary_oarchive<portable_binary_oarchive>;
>      friend class boost::archive::save_access;
>  #endif
> -    void save_impl(const long l){
> +    void save_impl(long l){
>          long ll = l;
>          char size = 0;
>          if(l < 0){
>
> Tested on Darwin (both PowerPC and Intel); shall I commit to the trunk
> and the release branch?
>
> - Doug
> _______________________________________________
> Unsubscribe & other changes:
> http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost