Subject: Re: [boost] Testing procedure
From: Robert Ramey (ramey_at_[hidden])
Date: 2011-01-31 14:27:46
Christopher Jefferson wrote:
> On 31 Jan 2011, at 17:14, Robert Ramey wrote:
>>> The aim would be to speed processing of testing by reducing the
>>> cycle time (most libraries most of the time don't need re-testing).
> Except it isn't unusual for changes in one library (see the recent
> filesystem v2 -> v3 upgrade) to break other libraries.
means that a library API is making a breaking change which SHOULD be
I don't believe that this is a common occurence. I get the from belief
from experience in tracking down errors in my own libraries which
only rarely turn out to be a breaking change on the release branch
of some other library. I don't dispute that it can and does happen,
but I don't think it happens very often.
> Unsubscribe & other changes:
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk