Subject: Re: [boost] Will 1.45 incorporate active regression tickets?
From: Patrick Horgan (phorgan1_at_[hidden])
Date: 2010-11-01 18:58:29
On 11/01/2010 10:45 AM, Jim Bell wrote:
> ... elision by patrick >8 ...
> I don't insist that anything on the regression matrix must be called
> 'regression', but does an unexplained failure on the regression matrix
> deserve special attention? I think so, as unfair as that is when new
> platforms are added. It's something we *know should* work.
That's a great definition of a regression, when you
know that something should work, because it already
worked, but somebody did something to it and now it
(Not to include the other case where I know the code I
wrote SHOULD work, but it doesn't and never has,
because it does what I said instead of reading my mind.)
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk