From: nielsdekker_at_[hidden]
Date: 2007-11-26 12:36:52
Author: niels_dekker
Date: 2007-11-26 12:36:52 EST (Mon, 26 Nov 2007)
New Revision: 41402
URL: http://svn.boost.org/trac/boost/changeset/41402
Log:
Marked value_init_test failures on Borland C++ as "expected failures", as discussed with Fernando Cacciola.
Text files modified:
trunk/status/explicit-failures-markup.xml | 16 ++++++++++++++++
1 files changed, 16 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
Modified: trunk/status/explicit-failures-markup.xml
==============================================================================
--- trunk/status/explicit-failures-markup.xml (original)
+++ trunk/status/explicit-failures-markup.xml 2007-11-26 12:36:52 EST (Mon, 26 Nov 2007)
@@ -5409,6 +5409,22 @@
</note>
</mark-expected-failures>
<mark-expected-failures>
+ <test name="value_init_test"/>
+ <toolset name="borland-5.6*"/>
+ <toolset name="borland-5.8*"/>
+ <toolset name="borland-5.9*"/>
+ <note author="Niels Dekker">
+ This test typically fails on Borland C++, because of an issue described by
+ <a href="http://svn.boost.org/trac/boost/ticket/1459">
+ ticket #1459, "value_initialized leaves data uninitialized,
+ when using Borland"</a>. The issue is caused by a
+ compiler bug, reported at the website of Codegear/Borland:
+ <a href="http://qc.codegear.com/wc/qcmain.aspx?d=51854">
+ Report #51854, "Value-initialization: POD struct
+ should be zero-initialized"</a>.
+ </note>
+ </mark-expected-failures>
+ <mark-expected-failures>
<test name="operators_test"/>
<toolset name="gcc-3.4.5_linux_x86_64"/>
<note author="Vladimir Prus">