Michael Glassford writes:
"Aleksey Gurtovoy" <agurtovoy@meta-comm.com> wrote in message
Aaron,
Thanks for the information. I'm going to mark the corresponding failure as expected, then, with the following note:
This functionality has not been implemented yet. The library developers plan to implement it for the next release.
Yes, this is what should be done. Thanks.
For the rest of the list:
CodeWarrior 8.3
Yes.
Borland 5.6.4
Yes.
Intel C++ 7.1 (for Windows)
I'm not sure. Since Intel 8 passes, it would be good to see if Intel 7.1 could pass too.
I've marked it as expected for the time being. If somebody fixes it before the release, I'll remove the markup.
as well, right?
I believe CW9.3 should be marked as well. It's actually passing for some reason, but I don't understand how it could; Stefan Slapeta is looking into it. I think it would be best to mark it as an expected failure so that the results show that its passing the tests is unexpected, at least until we figure out that why.
OK.
Possibly also VC7. VC6 and VC7.1 are supported, but I don't believe anyone ever looked into whether VC7 worked. Since the regression test is failing, it looks like either additional work is needed to support it or it should be marked as an expected failure for now.
OK, everything is marked up now according to your comments. The reports should reflect it within two hours. Thanks for the assistance, -- Aleksey Gurtovoy MetaCommunications Engineering