Re: [Boost-users] Compilers supported by a given library

From: Peter Dimov (pdimov_at_[hidden])
Date: 2006-06-09 11:24:44

Russell Hind wrote:
> Peter Dimov wrote:
>>
>> Yes, the matrix is a complete record of all libraries against all
>> supported compilers. If you look at
>>
>> http://engineering.meta-comm.com/boost-regression/CVS-RC_1_33_0/user/summary.html
>>
>
> But what this doesn't allow you to do is, for a new release, so which
> libraries have dropped/added support for your compiler.
>
> What I've always wanted to see (and have asked for before) is a
> difference between releases so I can see if it is worth me trying to
> upgrade to the latest version of boost or if I'm wasting my time
> because an important part of an important library no longer supports
> my compiler.
>
> The only answer at the moment seems to be try it and see, or some how
> work out which, out of all the regression tests, for all the libraries
> we use, are applicable to us still pass.  I don't think this is a very
> easy thing to do.

In principle, a "regression test" is supposed to ensure that a test that has 
been passing for a supported compiler in release N still passes in release 
N+1. Such failures are shown in red and are easy to spot. In practice it is 
the individual maintainer's responsibility to continue to support 
"problematic" compilers such as VC 6, BCC and most versions of SunCC. It's 
also possible that library changes cause failures or misbehaviors that 
aren't covered by a test case. But the theory is that unless a compiler is 
explicitly marked as "unsupported", a new failure in a later release should 
be treated as a bug and reported accordingly (the earlier the better).