From: David Abrahams (dave_at_[hidden])
Date: 2002-07-25 08:32:44
Why don't you just fix the #ifdef checks? Seems easier and more beneficial
----- Original Message -----
From: "Beman Dawes" <bdawes_at_[hidden]>
To: <boost_at_[hidden]>; <boost_at_[hidden]>
Sent: Thursday, July 25, 2002 9:20 AM
Subject: Re: [boost] Intel added to Win32 regression tests
> At 07:50 AM 7/25/2002, David Abrahams wrote:
> >From: "Beman Dawes" <bdawes_at_[hidden]>
> >> I've added Intel to the Win32 regression tests.
> >> There are a lot of iterator related failures. I'm not sure why that
> >> Intel uses the Microsoft library, yet the same tests pass with the
> >> Microsoft compiler.
> >> If someone can figure out the fix for the Intel iterator problem, it
> >> move quite a few tests from fail to pass.
> >In general it's due to checks in the test .cpp files which look for
> >BOOST_NO_TEMPLATE_PARTIAL_SPECIALIATION which should instead be looking
> >something that tells them whether iterator traits work for pointers.
> Ah! Yes, I remember now. You previously suggested using STLport as the
> library. I tried briefly, but got stopped by the lack of an STLport
> makefile for Intel 6.0. The older Intel makefiles don't work. I checked
> STLport forum, and someone else reported the same problems.
> If someone has a .mak that works for STLport 4.5.3 and Intel 6.0 on Win32
> that they would like to share, please send it to me privately. The
> folks would also appreciate it, I'm sure.
> Unsubscribe & other changes:
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk