AMDG On 02/11/2014 08:59 AM, John Maddock wrote:
This is a problem because the expectation for this file is to fail compilation when the macro ought to be set. However, it sometimes fails compilation (when std::addressof is not present at all), and sometimes fails at runtime (when std::addressof is present but doesn't pass the test, as in VC++12).
And we don't have a rule for that. compile-fail always wants it to fail compilation; run-fail always wants it to compile/link and only then fail. I don't know how one can express "this test should fail at compile time or at run time" in Boost.Build.
No there are several tests that don't work quite right because there's no opposite to "run" in Boost.Build.
I'd be happy to implement such a rule if anyone can figure out how to represent it in the dependency graph. What we have for run-fail looks somethings like this: DEPENDS x.obj : x.cpp ; msvc.compile.c++ x.obj : x.cpp ; DEPENDS x.exe : x.obj ; msvc.link x.exe : x.obj ; DEPENDS x.run : x.exe ; testing.capture-output : x.run : x.exe ; FAIL_EXPECTED x.run ; What we would need is a way to say that we expect x.obj OR x.exe OR x.run to fail. We could say that x.run passes iff testing.capture-output is skipped because a dependency failed or has non-zero exit status. But... this will make a mess of the total pass/fail counts and will fail badly with -q, not to mention that it will cause the test to pass if a library dependency fails to build. In Christ, Steven Watanabe