From: Gennadiy Rozental (gennadiy.rozental_at_[hidden])
Date: 2007-02-14 03:27:26
"Dave Steffen" <dgsteffen_at_[hidden]> wrote in message
news:17874.15059.105215.467627_at_yttrium.numerica.us...
> > Yep. That's the reason expected failures usage should be
> > limited.
>
> Well, yes. In fact, I'm curious about your use cases for expected
> failures. What do you think it means for a failure to be expected?
In my own test modules I don't use it at all. But than here at wark we don't
have well esteblished regression testing.
> Ah... we're in the process of moving to 1.33.1 right now. (We have
> to do regression tests, etc.) We'll go to 1.34 when it comes out,
> unless it's seriously delayed... hmm... [comments snipped] :-)
I recommend you to try to use 1.34 RC even if it is Boost.Test only. My
guess it should work even when compiled in 1.33.1 environment.
Gennadiy