incubator-stdcxx-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Mark Brown <>
Subject Re: Problem building stdcxx-4.2.0-rc7 on Solaris
Date Tue, 23 Oct 2007 19:31:49 GMT
Martin Sebor wrote:
> [snip]
> Here are a few possibilities:
> 1. Clean slate. Everything compiles and links cleanly with no
>    errors or warnings, and runs successfully to completion with
>    zero failed assertions.
> 2. Warnings acceptable, no errors. Same as above except that
>    warnings are allowed. (How many warnings? I.e., what's the
>    threshold?)
> 3. Warnings and some failed assertions acceptable. Just like (2)
>    except that tests are allowed to report some failed assertions.
>    (Again, how many failed assertions are acceptable?)
> 4. Status quo. I.e., some warnings are acceptable, compilation
>    or linker errors (except in the library) are acceptable if
>    they are attributable to platform bugs or limitations, some
>    (small number) of runtime errors, including abnormal exits,
>    are expected.
> Ideally, we'd shoot for (1). Frankly, I don't see it happening
> without a monumental effort. I'm not even convinced that (2) is
> doable. Maybe (3), with a lot of work. I agree that (4) is less
> than optimal.
> Thoughts?

I think #2 should be the goal on common platforms although I can
appreciate that enforcing the rule in rare environments could be
hard. I suppose it's up to us to decide what the "common" target
platforms are. In my opinion, Linux should definitely be one.
Windows another. Solaris is also pretty widely available. Others?

-- Mark

View raw message