Re: [boost] [Config] Macros for the absence of a full C++11 <memory> implementation

Subject: Re: [boost] [Config] Macros for the absence of a full C++11 <memory> implementation
From: John Maddock (boost.regex_at_[hidden])
Date: 2014-02-17 04:48:35

> We could say that x.run passes iff
> testing.capture-output is skipped
> because a dependency failed or has
> non-zero exit status.  But... this
> will make a mess of the total pass/fail
> counts and will fail badly with -q,
> not to mention that it will cause the
> test to pass if a library dependency
> fails to build.

I realise this may not be possible, but a better rule would be a "not" 
rule: passes only if it's dependency failed.  But like you say, the 
total pass/fail count would presumably be messed up?

John.