> Is the "latest AIX v10.1 compiler" the same as the IBM VaCPP used in the trunk tests? These
> tests show that compiler failing a number of tests which use export. This has been traced
>to the compiler optimizing out code not explicitly referred to.
>
>Robert Ramey
I am not familiar with the trunk tests. However XL 10.1.0.3 AIX is the latest C++ compiler. This
use vacpp as the bjam toolset argument. But internally I gather it uses xlC.
When I ran the sample in the Totalview(debugger) it shows the following.
Can't read type info for "basic_pointer_oserializer": Expecting mangled name, and didn't find one.
Can't read type info for "basic_pointer_iserializer": Expecting mangled name, and didn't find one.
Can't read type info for "singleton<boost__archive__detail__<unnamed>__guid_initializer<RepeatBase> >": Expecting ":", and didn't find one.
Can't read type info for "singleton<boost__archive__detail__<unnamed>__guid_initializer<RepeatDerived> >": Expecting ":", and didn't find one.
Can't read type info for "singleton_wrapper<boost__archive__detail__<unnamed>__guid_initializer<RepeatBase> >": Expecting ":", and didn't find one.
Can't read type info for "singleton_wrapper<boost__archive__detail__<unnamed>__guid_initializer<RepeatDerived> >": Expecting ":", and didn't find one.
Can't read type info for "error_info_container": Expecting mangled name, and didn't find one.
Can't read type info for "init_guid<RepeatBase>": Expecting ":", and didn't find one.
Can't read type info for "init_guid<RepeatDerived>": Expecting ":", and didn't find one.
From your reply your saying that this is a compiler bug
Do you know if any defect report has been raised ?
Is there any workaround that stops the compiler doing these optimisation.
If not is there possibility of changing the serialization code ?
Best regards,
Ta,
Avi