Re: [boost] Re: checked_delete / CW8

From: Peter Dimov (pdimov_at_[hidden])
Date: 2003-08-18 07:40:42

Daniel Frey wrote:
> Peter Dimov wrote:
>> It is worth mentioning that this is a confirmed bug in CW
>> with -iso_templates on (unreferenced typedefs are incorrectly
>> optimized out at definition time). Masking compiler bugs in this way
>> does not help compiler writers who use Boost as a test suite.
>
> The bug is already fixed for the CW9 and all other compilers weren't
> affected anyway, so I thought it's pointless to add
>
> #if defined(__MWERKS__) && __MWERKS__ < 0x3200
>
> to protect the new code. Also, you haven't done that for the fix for
> the Intel-compiler yourself, so why do you mention it now?

Because the two cases are different. In the Intel case, the compiler
deliberately allows certain (not really uncommon) broken code in <headers>,
presumably in order to compile some broken system header. In the Metrowerks
case our tests exposed a compiler bug that wasn't deliberately coded in. Had
our headers been "fixed" beforehand, the compiler bug wouldn't have been
caught.

Thanks for listening.