Regression testing (1.33)
Since we seem to be getting close (date anyone?) to the release of 1.33, I've changed my testing cycle to 8 times a day to improve turnaround for the library authors. The only remaining failures in VC-8_0 are some datetime things (the localtime test is clearly a deliberate choice on someone's part to make dates before 1970 "illegal"). Are there any representatives from either Microsoft or Dinkumware here who can explain this decision? Should we mark them as "expected failures" (though I'd object to having the block turn green simply because _I_ beileve it is an error and should show up as such) the two "input facet" test failures show only: Run output [2005-05-31 17:13:49 UTC]: EXIT STATUS: 666 not a lot of information for chasing down the actual problem. Ditto the "errors handling test" in threads, not much to go on. btw, I notice in the threads test that I seem to be the only person running some of the tests? Is there something wrong with the test running scripts? Victor A. Wagner Jr. http://rudbek.com The five most dangerous words in the English language: "There oughta be a law"
On Tue, 31 May 2005 11:38:09 -0700, Victor A. Wagner Jr. wrote
Since we seem to be getting close (date anyone?) to the release of 1.33, I've changed my testing cycle to 8 times a day to improve turnaround for the library authors.
Thx -- that's very helpful -- hope the backend processing can keep up!
The only remaining failures in VC-8_0 are some datetime things (the localtime test is clearly a deliberate choice on someone's part to make dates before 1970 "illegal"). Are there any representatives from either Microsoft or
These are just warnings, you'll note that the test compiles and runs -- until it blows up like the others...
Dinkumware here who can explain this decision? Should we mark them as "expected failures" (though I'd object to having the block turn green simply because _I_ beileve it is an error and should show up as such)
I investigated this. What they've done is deprecated the standard interface because of 'security issues' and invented a new one that is 'safer'. However, there may be some cost in terms of speed. In any case, I was reluctant to move away from the standard interface just for this compiler at the last minute before a release. BTW, I'm pretty sure this happened in the last beta upgrade b/c I don't remember seeing this b/f.
the two "input facet" test failures show only: Run output [2005-05-31 17:13:49 UTC]: EXIT STATUS: 666
not a lot of information for chasing down the actual problem.
Yeah -- I put some debugging code in but to no avail. Any chance you could trap it in the debugger and send me a stack trace? I didn't pay much attention earlier since when Carl was running with VC8 for awhile this was all passing on his machine... Jeff
Jeff Garland wrote:
On Tue, 31 May 2005 11:38:09 -0700, Victor A. Wagner Jr. wrote
Since we seem to be getting close (date anyone?) to the release of 1.33, I've changed my testing cycle to 8 times a day to improve turnaround for the library authors.
Thx -- that's very helpful -- hope the backend processing can keep up!
I think it can handle it. It's been handling my runs when people are checking things in repeatedly and I end up running 20 or so cycles each day in some cases. Aleksey and Misha have done an awesome job with the processing! -- -- Grafik - Don't Assume Anything -- Redshift Software, Inc. - http://redshift-software.com -- rrivera/acm.org - grafik/redshift-software.com -- 102708583/icq - grafikrobot/aim - Grafik/jabber.org
participants (3)
-
Jeff Garland -
Rene Rivera -
Victor A. Wagner Jr.