I think that Greg Comeau has a good point in his email below - reporting separate pass / warn / fail statistics in the regression summary can be misleading to naive readers.
On the other hand, we certainly want to continue to report warnings in the tables themselves.
So it seems to me that in the summary we should lump "pass" and "warn" from the tables together into a single "pass" category in the summary.
Opinions?
Right, I'm not suggesting to remove the warnings. Just another thought, which may complicate as well, but instead of
33 | 33 | 34
use:
33+33 | 34
or
66(33 + 33) | 34
- Greg
------- Comeau C/C++ 4.3.0.1: FULL CORE LANGUAGE, INCLUDING TC1 Comeau C/C++ ONLINE ==> http://www.comeaucomputing.com/tryitout World Class Compilers: Breathtaking C++, Amazing C99, Fabulous C90. Comeau C/C++ with Dinkumware's Libraries. Have you tried it? [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.comeaucomputing.com
_______________________________________________ Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost