Simon Atanasyan skrev:
2006/10/19, John Maddock <john@johnmaddock.co.uk>:
Thanks for information, while we have your attention, can we persuade you to take a look at http://engineering.meta-comm.com/boost-regression/CVS-RC_1_34_0/developer/is... and scan down for the Sun-5.8 failures?
There are a few that are showing internal signals in the compiler, if you can give us an idea of which if any may be fixable, and which we should just shrug and move on over, that would be a big help.
rational/rational_test Fixed in the next patch (06)
spirit/mix_and_match_trees Known bug. Just change "typedef rule<Scanner> rule" to "typedef rule<Scanner> rule_"
parameter/python_test I cannot say anything because I don't have installed Python.
filesystem/mbcopy filesystem/wide_test mpl/vector_c Fixed in the development branch.
parameter/preprocessor_deduced parameter/optional_deduced_sfinae Bugs have not beed fixed yet.
I need a time to investigate is it possible to create workaround for these bugs.
Douglas Gregor, is the contact on the OSL4-V2 sun-5.8 tests. But I fire off a question here: Is there a rationale following the decision to mark some of the libraries in boost as N/A for this compiler? This seems to apply to ublas, phyton, statechart and expressive. Does this mean they have never been tested? Or are they deemed hopeless? Or simply not run for whatever other reasons? I would also like to hear Simon Atanasyan's perspective on compatibility with these libraries. Are there any known issues? As a user of this compiler and boost for many years now, it is exciting to notice how quickly Sun recently has been closing in on boost compliance. --- Bjorn Roald