Re:[boost] Re: question regarding vacpp tests and mpl

From: Robert Ramey (ramey_at_[hidden])
Date: 2004-07-26 11:50:30

Toon Knapen wrote:

Message: 13
Date: Mon, 26 Jul 2004 15:02:27 +0200
From: Toon Knapen <toon.knapen_at_[hidden]>

>Aleksey Gurtovoy wrote:

>> I think the most practical way to
>> approach the error is to simplify the above to the bare minimum
>> (ignoring the semantics for now), and see how the compiler reacts. For
>> instance,
>> 
>> #if BOOST_WORKAROUND(__IBMCPP__, BOOST_TESTED_AT(600))
>>     typedef
>>         BOOST_DEDUCED_TYPENAME mpl::apply_if<
>>             is_base_and_derived<basic_traits, T>,
>>             traits_class_level<T>,
>>             mpl::int_<object_serializable>
>>             >::type type;
>> #else
>>     // original code ...
>> 
>> #endif
>> 

>I tried Aleksey's suggestion above and it seems to improve the situation
>for the serialization lib on vacpp. I suggest to apply the suggested modif.

The problem is that the rest of the library depends upon the semantics of
the operation.  So, I can't just roll in the modification and declare
victory. I can see experimenting as a way to discover an equivalent
formulation that will compile under vacpp.  But doing this isn't practical
for me with a one day test turnaround.  So I feel I have no choice but to
set it aside for now.  Of course, if "someone" wants to entertain himself
with this little puzzle and has convenient access to the compiler - then I
would be very appreciative.

Thanks for your help.

Robert Ramey