Clarification about the cons_virtual_derivation.cc tests

[Paolo Carlini]

Hi,
>> Therefore, I'm a little puzzled. I'm not sure why we want to have
>> fails here (then xfailed); I'm not sure whether we believe we can
>> change something in our specific implementation in order to have
>> passes, while remaining conforming. Or whether we want to pursue this
>> issue as DR?!? Can you clarify?
>>     
> I am using these as markers for some ongoing error-handling work,
> and understand that the current state may be confusing. 
>   
Ok, thanks. I'll see if I can tweak a bit the tests to avoid xfails 
while keeping of course the tests themselves and the general logic.

Paolo.