Subject: Re: [boost] Will 1.45 incorporate active regression tickets?
From: Jim Bell (Jim_at_[hidden])
Date: 2010-11-02 06:50:23
On 1:59 PM, Patrick Horgan wrote:
> 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 doesn't.
> (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