This is the mail archive of the libstdc++@gcc.gnu.org mailing list for the libstdc++ project.

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format:	[Raw text]

Re: regex patch

From: "Stephen M. Webb" <stephenw dot webb at bregmasoft dot ca>
To: libstdc++ at gcc dot gnu dot org
Cc: Jonathan Wakely <jwakely dot gcc at gmail dot com>, stephen dot webb at bregmasoft dot ca
Date: Fri, 18 Jun 2010 15:23:58 -0400
Subject: Re: regex patch
References: <201006181332.51474.stephenw.webb@bregmasoft.ca>
References: <AANLkTil5kf3-0aJlrHD8G5Z97MD12qPVmCPhaI6wMrlc@mail.gmail.com>
Reply-to: stephen dot webb at bregmasoft dot ca

On 18/06/10 14:21, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
> On 18 June 2010 18:32, Stephen M. Webb wrote:
> > (1) I have two test cases that fail because the functionality has not yet
> > been implemented. ?What is the standard operating procedure for this?
> > ?I'd rather have failing tests cases that eventually get fixed than to
> > have the problems missed because the test cases are absent or xfailed.
>
> Is it functionality in <regex> or elsewhere in the library?  In any
> case, the tests could be checked in as XFAILs.

OK, the fails are onyl in <regex>.  I have xfailed them for now.  Fixed my 
regeneration problem, too, and I have a patch ready to go.

One last question, though.  This introduces an abi_check failure.  Should that 
be fixed first?

-- 
Stephen M. Webb
stephen.webb@bregmasoft.ca

Follow-Ups:
- Re: regex patch
  - From: Paolo Carlini

References:
- regex patch
  - From: Stephen M. Webb
- Re: regex patch
  - From: Jonathan Wakely

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]