From: Hubert HOLIN (Hubert.Holin_at_[hidden])
Date: 2002-11-14 08:05:18
Somewhere in the E.U., le 14/11/2002
John Maddock wrote:
> > Looking at the failure conditions for special functions, for M$VCPP
> > v7, it seems that the branch for the case where
> > BOOST_NO_TEMPLATE_PARTIAL_SPECIALIZATION is *NOT* defined is taken, but
> > this symbol is defined in Boost 1.29.0 for that compiler. Is there a
> > problem with the config files for the regression on the main trunk?
> Maybe because your headers don't include the necessary header
> <boost/config.hpp> ???
What I was wondering about was whether the test machine (not mine, I'm
still under MacOS 9.2.2 using CodeWarrior) had its headers properly configured.
The released version has BOOST_NO_TEMPLATE_PARTIAL_SPECIALIZATION
defined for that compiler, but the main trunk version behaves as though
such is not the case. Ergo, either it was found it should not have been
defined, and the "#define" has been deleted between the release version
and the main trunk, or the merging of the release trunk into the main
trunk left out part of the config headers. Or I missed something...
> John Maddock
> Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk