Re: [boost] The problems with Boost development

Subject: Re: [boost] The problems with Boost development
From: Robert Ramey (ramey_at_[hidden])
Date: 2010-03-24 15:18:43

Vladimir Prus wrote:
> Robert Ramey wrote:

>> Ahhh yes, I forgot about that.  But one then has to troll through
>> all the bjam output which I suppose is OK. I still love my table.

> Not really. You need to either (i) have IDE that shows the first error
> messages automatically or (ii) run bjam with the "-q" option so that
> it stops on the first error. When developing locally, it's typically
> rare to have 'expected failures' so you might was well jump on the
> first failure you get.

Actually, I'm running this when I THINK I'm done.  It takes
so long I have to let it run overnight.  I don't want it to stop
on the first error.  Basically this is the local version of running
the trunk tests.  I'm  intrigued that it was deemed
necessary to provide tables of the test results done by the
remote testers but there never seemed to be interest in something
equivalent for running the local tests.  I know you've manifested
a lack of enthusiam for my table generator, but I'm think you
should re-consider this.  It's a perfect compliment to the bjam
build system and makes it more valuable and useful.

Also I've always been unhappy about the chart displayed
for the remote testing.  Other than the compiler, it doesn't
show me the build features debug/release, static/dynamic, etc.
much less test the combinations.  I really need this for
the serialization library because a lot of features such
as export, DLL functionality, etc depend upon behavior
which is undefined by the standard.  Examples of this
is code-stripping which varies depending on the compiler
and the build settings.  Maybe these characteristics
of the serialization library make it require more testing
than other libraries.

Robert Ramey