From: John Maddock (john_maddock_at_[hidden])
Date: 2002-07-01 06:17:31
> In addition to these problems, I'm having an issue with how we're setting
> BOOST_HAS_LONG_LONG. When I compile Boost.Python with KCC on OSF, one
> translation unit comes out with this macro defined, and another comes out
> with it undefined. I'm not yet sure about the causes of this problem.
It should be set centrally in boost/config/suffix.hpp, the only way I can
see it being set differently in different translation units is if the macros
it tests for to check whether it should be set or not (ULLONG_MAX,
ULONG_LONG_MAX, ULONGLONG_MAX), are defined somewhere other than <limits.h>
and one TU includes a header that sets these, and one does not.
> Also, I recently had to fix up the config for Metrowerks. Our policy had
> been to keep non-conformance workarounds for versions we hadn't accounted
> for unless BOOST_STRICT_CONFIG was #defined. We handn't accounted for
> CWPro7.2 yet (__MWERKS__ == 0x2407), but everything worked because the
> neccessary workarounds were essentially the same as the ones for CWPro7.1.
Go ahead and make whatever changes you need to the Metrowerks config -
that's not a compiler I know anything about.
Almost recovered from holiday yours,
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk