Re: [boost] RC_1_30_0 compile error with SGI MIPSpro Compilers

From: Ralf W. Grosse-Kunstleve (rwgk_at_[hidden])
Date: 2003-03-07 17:38:06

--- David Abrahams <dave_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> "Ralf W. Grosse-Kunstleve" <rwgk_at_[hidden]> writes:
> 
> > David and Aleksey, could you please review the patches and tell
> > me which are OK to check in? -- I am a bit worried about the
> > two patches in the mpl/aux_/preprocessed directory. Are these
> > files auto-generated? Are there master files that should be
> > patched instead?
> 
> Well, in addition, I believe:
> /boost/boost/mpl/aux_/lambda_no_ctps.hpp.

OK, here are the two additional patches:

Index: lambda_no_ctps.hpp
===================================================================
RCS file: /cvsroot/boost/boost/boost/mpl/aux_/lambda_no_ctps.hpp,v
retrieving revision 1.7
diff -r1.7 lambda_no_ctps.hpp
127c127
<         typedef protect< BOOST_PP_CAT(bind,i)<
---
>         typedef mpl::protect< BOOST_PP_CAT(bind,i)<
Index: iter_fold_if_impl.hpp
===================================================================
RCS file: /cvsroot/boost/boost/boost/mpl/aux_/iter_fold_if_impl.hpp,v
retrieving revision 1.5
diff -r1.5 iter_fold_if_impl.hpp
104c104
<         >::template result_< Iterator,State,ForwardOp,next<Iterator> > impl_;
---
>         >::template result_< Iterator,State,ForwardOp,mpl::next<Iterator> >
impl_;
> The patch that worries me
> the most is the one in is_base_and_derived.hpp, but not seriously:
> it's just that it should probably be checking __EDG_VERSION instead of
> looking for the sgi compiler.
I don't know what EDG version to use in the #ifdef. I'll leave this as is for
now. If someone else has the same problem on a different platform we can
generalize.
> Otherwise, they all look fine to me.
OK, I'll wait for a word from Aleksey. If he is happy I'll check in the eight
patches, both into the trunk and the RC_1_30_0 branch.
BTW: David, compilation of as_to_python_function.cpp fails on all platforms.
"hopefully_illegal" suggests that this is expected, but then again the test is
not called xxx_fail.cpp like the other tests that are expected to fail. Is
everything all right here? Don't you want to rename the test?
Ralf
__________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Tax Center - forms, calculators, tips, more
http://taxes.yahoo.com/