From: Joaquin M Lopez Munoz (joaquin_at_[hidden])
Date: 2004-05-19 10:02:38
Douglas Gregor <gregod <at> cs.rpi.edu> writes:
> On Tuesday 18 May 2004 02:59 pm, Rozental, Gennadiy wrote:
> > > On Friday 14 May 2004 01:20 pm, Rozental, Gennadiy wrote:
> > > > Do you have any suggestions?
> > >
> > > I've fixed it on Borland, and tried to fix it on Intel 7.1,
> > > Comeau, and Sun
> > > based on the error messages (but I don't have those compilers
> > > handy to test).
> > >
> > > Doug
> > This is not a fix I am looking for. What you did makes whole facility
> > useless on affected compiler.
> > I look for solution that will retain functionality.
> *Which* fix for what compiler? There were multiple changes for multiple
> compilers there.
> Lots of other library tests depend on the test libraries building properly.
> Building and executing propertly on these compilers is my #1 priority,
> otherwise, the rest of us can't get any meaningful results out of the
> regression tests.
Maybe the error in BCB can be fixed, along with ICC and Comeau,
by replacing line 225 of unit_test_suite.cpp
p_stages_amount.value = p_stages_amount.value+1;
which seems to work in ICC and does not force you to unprotect
p_stages_amount as you did for BCB. The fix at least works for
ICC 7.1 for Windows (I tried). I guess that the problem in ICC and
Comeau (which are EDG-based, if I'm not wrong) might have
something to do with active issue #385, though I don't know for
JoaquÃn M LÃ³pez MuÃ±oz
TelefÃ³nica, InvestigaciÃ³n y Desarrollo
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, david.abrahams at rcn.com, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk