Boost logo

Boost Users :

Subject: Re: [Boost-users] [Random] normal distribution different behaviour 1.55 vs 1.57
From: Neal Becker (ndbecker2_at_[hidden])
Date: 2014-12-19 06:56:08

oswin krause wrote:

> On 19.12.2014 00:00, Semen Trygubenko / Семен Тригубенко wrote:
>> On the positive side, our tests are now much more robust to that sort
>> of changes. :)
> We had the same issue a few years ago when changing to boost::random -
> almost every test broke. It turned out that testing for specific values
> or only a small number of samples (the only tests which are affected by
> this kind of change) can mask a lot of bugs - even though some values
> seem to be correct, confidence intervals or measured variances can still
> be off. So for us a more robust test also meant a better test that
> discovered bugs.
> But yeah: such a change should be part of the change-log.
> _______________________________________________

Not sufficient! Any such change should be discussed with the boost user
community first. Boost should have a policy that any breaking changes are
discussed on boost-dev.

Boost-users list run by williamkempf at, kalb at, bjorn.karlsson at, gregod at, wekempf at