28 Jun
2007
28 Jun
'07
10:38 p.m.
Boris Gubenko wrote:
Peter Dimov wrote:
[...] In fact you can even mark it a known failure for any compiler since this is probably going to be the right default for new toolsets for quite a while.
You mean "<toolset name="*"/> so it unexpectedly passes on gcc-4.3.0_c++0x ?
Yes, I think that this will be best (unless it inhibits testing entirely). Unfortunately our current infrastructure gives us no easy way to say "only run this test when BOOST_HAS_RVALUE_REFS is defined, else consider it an expected failure". Marking it as expected failure everywhere seems the closest approximation.