From: Peter Dimov (pdimov_at_[hidden])
Date: 2007-06-28 18:38:29
Boris Gubenko wrote:
> Peter Dimov wrote:
>> [...] In fact you can even mark it a known failure for any compiler
>> since this is probably going to be the right default for new
>> toolsets for quite
>> a while.
>
> You mean "<toolset name="*"/> so it unexpectedly passes on
> gcc-4.3.0_c++0x ?
Yes, I think that this will be best (unless it inhibits testing entirely).
Unfortunately our current infrastructure gives us no easy way to say "only
run this test when BOOST_HAS_RVALUE_REFS is defined, else consider it an
expected failure". Marking it as expected failure everywhere seems the
closest approximation.