You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@stdcxx.apache.org by Martin Sebor <se...@roguewave.com> on 2007/03/08 18:59:10 UTC
RFC: stdcxx 4.2 platforms
I think it's time for us to start planning the next stdcxx
release. We have fixed a ton of bugs since 4.1.3 and 4.1.4
and there have been a bunch of new platforms that we should
certify (e.g., gcc 4.1 or MSVC 8 to name the most popular
ones). I would also like us to clean up the Cygwin and Mac
OS X ports that didn't work in previous releases. Are there
any other new platforms we should provide support for?
Martin
Re: RFC: stdcxx 4.2 platforms
Posted by Martin Sebor <se...@roguewave.com>.
Farid Zaripov wrote:
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Martin Sebor [mailto:sebor@roguewave.com]
>> Sent: Monday, March 12, 2007 8:34 PM
>> To: stdcxx-dev@incubator.apache.org
>> Subject: Re: RFC: stdcxx 4.2 platforms
>>
>>> I would find Cygwin test results helpful. It would also be
>> helpful do semi-regular builds of some popular C++ software
>> with stdcxx (like boost) and post the results.
>>
>> I agree that building Boost (and perhaps other popular
>> packages as well) would be a useful enhancement to the stdcxx
>> test suite.
>> The problem is first of all porting Boost to stdcxx (i.e.,
>> getting the infrastructure to work), and then also the cycles
>> involved in running the Boost test suite and analyzing the
>> test results. I suppose if someone were to volunteer to do
>> the first pass (i.e., get the Boost infrastructure ported and
>> help analyze the first set of results) we could then add it
>> to our automated test infrastructure and run it perhaps not
>> every night but maybe weekly or monthly and handle the
>> maintenance of the project.
>
> I would like to do that, if there is no objection.
That would be great! If you need help ask on of the Boost
mailing lists:
http://www.boost.org/more/mailing_lists.htm
The Boost maintainers might be interested in integrating
the results of your work into their build infrastructure
to make it easier for users to build their software with
stdcxx.
I'm CC'ing stdcxx-user in case someone on that list who
isn't subscribed to stdcxx-dev has any suggestions or
comments on the subject.
Martin
Re: RFC: stdcxx 4.2 platforms
Posted by Martin Sebor <se...@roguewave.com>.
Farid Zaripov wrote:
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Martin Sebor [mailto:sebor@roguewave.com]
>> Sent: Monday, March 12, 2007 8:34 PM
>> To: stdcxx-dev@incubator.apache.org
>> Subject: Re: RFC: stdcxx 4.2 platforms
>>
>>> I would find Cygwin test results helpful. It would also be
>> helpful do semi-regular builds of some popular C++ software
>> with stdcxx (like boost) and post the results.
>>
>> I agree that building Boost (and perhaps other popular
>> packages as well) would be a useful enhancement to the stdcxx
>> test suite.
>> The problem is first of all porting Boost to stdcxx (i.e.,
>> getting the infrastructure to work), and then also the cycles
>> involved in running the Boost test suite and analyzing the
>> test results. I suppose if someone were to volunteer to do
>> the first pass (i.e., get the Boost infrastructure ported and
>> help analyze the first set of results) we could then add it
>> to our automated test infrastructure and run it perhaps not
>> every night but maybe weekly or monthly and handle the
>> maintenance of the project.
>
> I would like to do that, if there is no objection.
That would be great! If you need help ask on of the Boost
mailing lists:
http://www.boost.org/more/mailing_lists.htm
The Boost maintainers might be interested in integrating
the results of your work into their build infrastructure
to make it easier for users to build their software with
stdcxx.
I'm CC'ing stdcxx-user in case someone on that list who
isn't subscribed to stdcxx-dev has any suggestions or
comments on the subject.
Martin
RE: RFC: stdcxx 4.2 platforms
Posted by Farid Zaripov <Fa...@epam.com>.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Martin Sebor [mailto:sebor@roguewave.com]
> Sent: Monday, March 12, 2007 8:34 PM
> To: stdcxx-dev@incubator.apache.org
> Subject: Re: RFC: stdcxx 4.2 platforms
>
> > I would find Cygwin test results helpful. It would also be
> helpful do semi-regular builds of some popular C++ software
> with stdcxx (like boost) and post the results.
>
> I agree that building Boost (and perhaps other popular
> packages as well) would be a useful enhancement to the stdcxx
> test suite.
> The problem is first of all porting Boost to stdcxx (i.e.,
> getting the infrastructure to work), and then also the cycles
> involved in running the Boost test suite and analyzing the
> test results. I suppose if someone were to volunteer to do
> the first pass (i.e., get the Boost infrastructure ported and
> help analyze the first set of results) we could then add it
> to our automated test infrastructure and run it perhaps not
> every night but maybe weekly or monthly and handle the
> maintenance of the project.
I would like to do that, if there is no objection.
Farid.
Re: RFC: stdcxx 4.2 platforms
Posted by Martin Sebor <se...@roguewave.com>.
Mark Brown wrote:
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: sebor@roguewave.com
>> Sent: Thu, 08 Mar 2007 10:59:10 -0700
>> To: stdcxx-dev@incubator.apache.org
>> Subject: RFC: stdcxx 4.2 platforms
>>
>> I think it's time for us to start planning the next stdcxx
>> release. We have fixed a ton of bugs since 4.1.3 and 4.1.4
>> and there have been a bunch of new platforms that we should
>> certify (e.g., gcc 4.1 or MSVC 8 to name the most popular
>> ones). I would also like us to clean up the Cygwin and Mac
>> OS X ports that didn't work in previous releases. Are there
>> any other new platforms we should provide support for?
>
> I would find Cygwin test results helpful. It would also be helpful do semi-regular builds of some popular C++ software with stdcxx (like boost) and post the results.
I agree that building Boost (and perhaps other popular packages
as well) would be a useful enhancement to the stdcxx test suite.
The problem is first of all porting Boost to stdcxx (i.e.,
getting the infrastructure to work), and then also the cycles
involved in running the Boost test suite and analyzing the test
results. I suppose if someone were to volunteer to do the first
pass (i.e., get the Boost infrastructure ported and help analyze
the first set of results) we could then add it to our automated
test infrastructure and run it perhaps not every night but maybe
weekly or monthly and handle the maintenance of the project.
Martin
RE: RFC: stdcxx 4.2 platforms
Posted by Mark Brown <mb...@inbox.com>.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: sebor@roguewave.com
> Sent: Thu, 08 Mar 2007 10:59:10 -0700
> To: stdcxx-dev@incubator.apache.org
> Subject: RFC: stdcxx 4.2 platforms
>
> I think it's time for us to start planning the next stdcxx
> release. We have fixed a ton of bugs since 4.1.3 and 4.1.4
> and there have been a bunch of new platforms that we should
> certify (e.g., gcc 4.1 or MSVC 8 to name the most popular
> ones). I would also like us to clean up the Cygwin and Mac
> OS X ports that didn't work in previous releases. Are there
> any other new platforms we should provide support for?
I would find Cygwin test results helpful. It would also be helpful do semi-regular builds of some popular C++ software with stdcxx (like boost) and post the results.
-- Mark
____________________________________________________________
FREE 3D MARINE AQUARIUM SCREENSAVER - Watch dolphins, sharks & orcas on your desktop!
Check it out at http://www.inbox.com/marineaquarium