From: Markus Schöpflin (markus.schoepflin_at_[hidden])
Date: 2004-08-25 12:55:59
Richard Hadsell wrote:
> Markus Schöpflin wrote:
>> The problem is, currently there are numerous regression test failures
>> due to the use of the old name mangling scheme, which go away when
>> ansi name mangling is selected. Therefore I thought it would be a
>> better alternative to use the more working alternative and document
>> that the old name mangling scheme gives troubles when used with boost.
> Having read the man page, as suggested by Ian McC, it's clear that
> '-model ansi' is the standard way to go. Since our tru64cxx65 days are
> numbered here, I will probably stick with Boost 1.31.0 for the duration.
You could still use the new version, you just would have to change the
name mangling back to the old behaviour. (And of course hope that non of
the libraries you are using is actually affected by the problem.)
> However, I would suggest a strong admonition (recommendation) in the
> docs about the desirability of using '-model ansi', justifying its use
> as the default, and an easy way for the user to configure Boost
> libraries with '-model arm'. (There may be applications that access
> shared libraries that cannot be recompiled.)
What would you consider an easy way? Manually editing the toolset
description would be out of the question I think, even if it's documented.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk