Subject: Re: [boost] Boost.Build merge?
From: Robert Ramey (ramey_at_[hidden])
Date: 2008-10-11 14:54:30
Vladimir Prus wrote:
> Robert Ramey wrote:
> Let me try to have all "i" dotted and "t" crossed:
> 1. Build.Build has extensive testsuite.
> 2. It would be nice to have it run together with library tests,
> to improve Boost.Build quality on some platforms where it's not
> actively tested by users. It will help Boost.Build users, as well
> folks who are both C++ Boost users and Boost.Build users.
great, then let's do it.
> 3. Any such improvement won't help C++ Boost itself much. The only
> thing C++ Boost cares is whether C++ Boost libraries and tests work.
not untrue - but a more robust boost build well permit better testing
especially on less frequent platforms.
> If a change breaking that on some platform is checked in, the current
> framework will surely detect this.
> Adding Boost.Build tests to the mix
> will only mean the breakage will be detected somewhat earlier and be
> somewhat easier to figure.
which would be quite helpful it seems to me.
> So, adding Boost.Build tests to the test results is not something
> C++ Boost users or developers should care very much about.
lol - well, I care about it. and everything in boost currently
depends upon it. So an improvement in robustness with this
tool would be very helpful.
If we already have an extensive test suite, why not run it?
What's the downside here?
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk