Boost logo

Boost :

From: Ralf W. Grosse-Kunstleve (rwgk_at_[hidden])
Date: 2003-03-18 08:36:09


--- David Abrahams <dave_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> "Ralf W. Grosse-Kunstleve" <rwgk_at_[hidden]> writes:
>
> > There are gcc 2.96 (Redhat 7.3) compilation error for
> > boost/libs/python/test/opaque.cpp:
> >
> > http://cci.lbl.gov/~rwgk/tmp/rc_1_30_0_opaque_fail.txt
> >
> > More recent gcc's don't seems to suffer from this problem.
> > I am not sure this is important enough to delay the release any further.
> > David?
> >
> > Ralf
>
> Hmm, looking at:
>
> # define BOOST_PYTHON_OPAQUE_SPECIALIZED_TYPE_ID(Pointee) \
> namespace boost { namespace python { \
> template<> \
> inline type_info type_id(boost::type<Pointee>*) { \
> return type_info (typeid (Pointee *)); \
> } \
> template<> \
> inline type_info type_id( \
> boost::type<const volatile Pointee &>*) { \
> return type_info (typeid (Pointee *)); \
> } \
> }}
>
> it seems to me that these aren't actually legal specializations
> (though I've never specialized functions before so I could be wrong).
> Shouldn't that be:
>
> template <>
> inline type_info type_id<Pointee>(boost::type<Pointee>*) {
> return type_info(typeid(Pointee*));
> }
>
> template <>
> inline type_info type_id<const volatile Pointee&>(
> boost::type<const volatile Pointee&>*) {
> return type_info(typeid(Pointee*));
> }
>
> ??

That change does not seem to make a difference. The compiler errors are still
exactly the same.
Ralf

__________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Platinum - Watch CBS' NCAA March Madness, live on your desktop!
http://platinum.yahoo.com


Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk