On Tue, 22 Mar 2005 08:46:07 -0600, Aleksey Gurtovoy wrote
I'm not sure how typical it is, though. For instance, I know that, as Boost users, here at Meta we care for more than one platform and for more than one compiler on each platform, and I'm sure that we are not the only mutli-platform folks out there.
No doubt.
I think that the big result grid, and the results by library only really help the library developers.
One advantage of a "big grid" is that when things are well (and when we release, they are :), it inspires significant confidence in quality and portability of the libraries. For instance, as a user, I find this one is very inspiring:
http://www.meta-comm.com/engineering/boost-regression/1_32_0/developer/summa... I find this view very misleading. It glosses over the fact that the developer has indicated some parts of a library may not be available for a particular compiler/platform. As an example, it might lead you to believe that all features of date_time are available on gcc 2.95.3 which just isn't the case.
So if we are wishing for things to happen, I'd say to change the user reports so that it presents single toolset results individually.
I'd hate to loose a user-oriented "big picture", but if we are targeting primarily _release_ user reports, we can have both.
Agree -- I just need to find time to write my little script ;-) Jeff