Re: [Boost-testing] Confusion about Borland test results

From: Aleksey Gurtovoy (agurtovoy_at_[hidden])
Date: 2005-06-23 12:54:49

David Abrahams writes:
> I'm trying to clean up some of the failures, and I'm seeing the
> indirect_iter_member_types test fail with bcc-5.6.4 here.  Why isn't
> it showing up as a failure on the meta-comm results page?

? It does -- http://engineering.meta-comm.com/boost-regression/CVS-HEAD/developer/iterator.html.

If you are asking about why is showing up as a _grey_ failure, just
click on the cell's link and you'll see:

Notes 

    [D. Abrahams] This failure is caused by a compiler bug. The
    compiler tends to drop const-ness and as a result some
    indirect_iterators will have pointer and reference members of T*
    and T& that should have been T const* and T const&.

    This failure was present in the reference ("last-known-good") release.

-- 
Aleksey Gurtovoy
MetaCommunications Engineering