On Sat, 15 Jan 2005 11:50:53 -0500, David Abrahams wrote
troy d. straszheim wrote:
David Abrahams wrote:
troy d. straszheim wrote:
I gotta say, this is really time-intensive work... I wonder if running regressions "by default" in both debug and release mode might not be good practice... It could be better to try to catch things like this on the way in.
It would be good to do, but it will take some work because the tests are not all currently designed to work in release "mode." Many of them use assert() and other constructs that are switched off by NDEBUG.
I'm sure that's true, but what's the percentage of tests actually affected? Some libraries don't have these constraints and could benefit from the release mode tests. Here's a couple pointers to some previous disucssion on this subject of regression testing options. http://lists.boost.org/MailArchives/boost/msg64471.php http://lists.boost.org/MailArchives/boost/msg05816.php Of course, as usual, the problem with any additions and changes is we need volunteers to step up and do the work. I set up and then stepped back from running regressions since Martin seemed to have Linux well covered. But I might be willing to run some release-mode Linux regression tests if that would help. Only thing is we probably need some tweaks to the config or regression scripts to allow this? Jeff