Aleksey Gurtovoy <agurtovoy@meta-comm.com> writes:
David Abrahams writes:
Aleksey Gurtovoy <agurtovoy@meta-comm.com> writes:
David Abrahams writes:
Aleksey Gurtovoy <agurtovoy@meta-comm.com> writes:
Should we mark Boost.Python as unusable with gcc 2.95.3/Intel 7.1-8.0 on Linux? The number of failures for these looks unhealthy -- http://tinyurl.com/5z3hy.
Well, no, we should fix whatever is causing the regressions.
What regressions are you referring to? Everything besides "data_members" has been failing in 1.31 as well. I was talking about green/yellow failures -- about 1/3 of the tests fail; is the library still usable in this state?
Oh, I understand.
The problems with gcc-2 only occur when C++ exceptions are thrown and the framework catches them, which happens quite often in those tests. So technically gcc-2 is usable if you're careful.
OK. Does that imply that somebody is going to look into fixing "data_members" regression with gcc-2.95.3-linux* (http://tinyurl.com/5p9jz)?
It's inconcievable to me that it could have passed in 1.31.0, since this is part of the test (which hasn't changed):
try: x.x = 77 ... except AttributeError: pass ... else: print 'no error'
So I don't think a fix is possible or practical. On second thought, let me try something; maybe something simple can be done about the majority of these failures. -- Dave Abrahams Boost Consulting http://www.boost-consulting.com