"Dave Steffen" <dgsteffen@numerica.us> wrote in message news:17874.15059.105215.467627@yttrium.numerica.us...
Yep. That's the reason expected failures usage should be limited.
Well, yes. In fact, I'm curious about your use cases for expected failures. What do you think it means for a failure to be expected?
In my own test modules I don't use it at all. But than here at wark we don't have well esteblished regression testing.
Ah... we're in the process of moving to 1.33.1 right now. (We have to do regression tests, etc.) We'll go to 1.34 when it comes out, unless it's seriously delayed... hmm... [comments snipped] :-)
I recommend you to try to use 1.34 RC even if it is Boost.Test only. My guess it should work even when compiled in 1.33.1 environment. Gennadiy