7 Dec
2012
7 Dec
'12
5:04 p.m.
On 7 December 2012 16:58, Tim Blechmann <tim@klingt.org> wrote:
regarding gcc, we would *only* have expected failures, as the required version (4.8) is neither released nor tested ...
As far as I'm concerned, failures on unreleased compilers aren't an issue. It's nice to support them, but often not worth the effort.
also, some of the failures are related to a timeout on the test machines ... especially the win32 test machines seem to be an order of magnitude slower than the linux ones ... which is a bit unfortunate, as lock-free data structures can only reasonably be tested with long stress tests ...
OK, sure. Timeouts are a real problem.