• Thomas Kuehne (16/16) Apr 17 2005 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
• Derek Parnell (16/39) Apr 18 2005 I've update the graphs at
• =?iso-8859-1?Q?Robert_M=2E_M=FCnch?= (7/16) Apr 21 2005 Thanks for this management summary, that's the info I like :-))
• Stewart Gordon (15/31) Apr 19 2005 Success rate up from 84.0% to 89.7% (we're nearly at the 90% mark, but
• Thomas Kuehne (11/16) Apr 19 2005 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

Thomas Kuehne <thomas-dloop kuehne.thisisspam.cn> writes:

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

XFAIL -> ERROR
http://dstress.kuehne.cn/nocompile/class_07.d

PASS -> ERROR
http://dstress.kuehne.cn/run/typeid_13.d

Open issues:
http://dstress.kuehne.cn/www/dstress.html

Complete results: (~1.4 MB)
http://dstress.kuehne.cn/www/results.html

Thomas


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----

iD8DBQFCY1WE3w+/yD4P9tIRAoR3AKCRa6nIwgSORweCx0iHOuHEzYW9nACgrz8m
Ql3EwR1UVEN4fcwhw676aAg=
=oW1W
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Derek Parnell <derek psych.ward> writes:

On Mon, 18 Apr 2005 08:36:53 +0200, Thomas Kuehne wrote:

 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
 Hash: SHA1
 
 XFAIL -> ERROR
 http://dstress.kuehne.cn/nocompile/class_07.d
 
 PASS -> ERROR
 http://dstress.kuehne.cn/run/typeid_13.d
 
 Open issues:
 http://dstress.kuehne.cn/www/dstress.html
 
 Complete results: (~1.4 MB)
 http://dstress.kuehne.cn/www/results.html
 
 Thomas
 
 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
 
 iD8DBQFCY1WE3w+/yD4P9tIRAoR3AKCRa6nIwgSORweCx0iHOuHEzYW9nACgrz8m
 Ql3EwR1UVEN4fcwhw676aAg=
 =oW1W
 -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

I've update the graphs at 

  http://www.users.bigpond.com/ddparnell/dstress_results.html

The salient points are :

** 89.7% pass rate (from 84.0%)

** Good to Bad ratio is now 8.74 (from 5.24). That is, for each failure
there are 8.74 successes.

** We had 76 more expected passes.
** We had 21 more expected failures.

** We had 7 fewer unexpected passes.
** We had 74 fewer unexpected failures.
** We had 16 fewer compiler crashes.

-- 
Derek
Melbourne, Australia
18/04/2005 5:05:18 PM

=?iso-8859-1?Q?Robert_M=2E_M=FCnch?= <robert.muench robertmuench.de> writes:

On Mon, 18 Apr 2005 09:20:46 +0200, Derek Parnell <derek psych.ward>  
wrote:

 The salient points are :

 ** 89.7% pass rate (from 84.0%)

 ** Good to Bad ratio is now 8.74 (from 5.24). That is, for each  
 failure there are 8.74 successes.

 ** We had 76 more expected passes.
 ** We had 21 more expected failures.

 ** We had 7 fewer unexpected passes.
 ** We had 74 fewer unexpected failures.
 ** We had 16 fewer compiler crashes.

Thanks for this management summary, that's the info I like :-))

-- 
Robert M. Münch
Management & IT Freelancer
http://www.robertmuench.de

Stewart Gordon <smjg_1998 yahoo.com> writes:

Thomas Kuehne wrote:
 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
 Hash: SHA1
 
 XFAIL -> ERROR
 http://dstress.kuehne.cn/nocompile/class_07.d
 
 PASS -> ERROR
 http://dstress.kuehne.cn/run/typeid_13.d
 
 Open issues:
 http://dstress.kuehne.cn/www/dstress.html
 
 Complete results: (~1.4 MB)
 http://dstress.kuehne.cn/www/results.html
 
 Thomas

Success rate up from 84.0% to 89.7% (we're nearly at the 90% mark, but 
will we be for long?)
Stability rate up from 98.5% to 99.5% (crossed the 99% mark, that must 
be a milestone!)

http://smjg.port5.com/pr/d/dstress.xls

BTW I noticed these:

1. Are you sure abstract_08 should error at line 20?  It's either this 
or line 15.  The spec doesn't clarify if abstract with a body should be 
allowed, or what it should mean if it is.

2. You've used the name destructor_04 twice, one in run and one in norun.

Stewart.

-- 
My e-mail is valid but not my primary mailbox.  Please keep replies on 
the 'group where everyone may benefit.

Thomas Kuehne <thomas-dloop kuehne.thisisspam.cn> writes:

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Stewart Gordon schrieb am Tue, 19 Apr 2005 12:06:23 +0100:
 BTW I noticed these:

 1. Are you sure abstract_08 should error at line 20?  It's either this 
 or line 15.  The spec doesn't clarify if abstract with a body should be 
 allowed, or what it should mean if it is.

Split into abstract_08 and 13.

 2. You've used the name destructor_04 twice, one in run and one in norun.

Thanks, fixed

Thomas


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----

iD8DBQFCZO493w+/yD4P9tIRAkuRAJ0UgBCm7akpVCTTZsCFu+yTnOzyrwCgkIjb
Y6JUHvpRFT3Odgv1jfQOZ2E=
=raW9
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----