From: Markus Schöpflin (markus.schoepflin_at_[hidden])
Date: 2005-06-20 07:44:55
John Maddock wrote:
>>Currently config/suffix.hpp contains the following code which seems pretty
>>wrong to me:
>>#if !defined(BOOST_HAS_LONG_LONG) && !defined(BOOST_NO_INTEGRAL_INT64_T)
>># define BOOST_NO_INTEGRAL_INT64_T
>>AFAICT, the existence of a 64 bit integral type has nothing to do with
>>support for long long types. On Tru64 for example, uint64_t is defined as
>>unsigned long and there is no unsigned long long when the compiler
>>in strict ansi mode.
>>Shouldn't these lines just be removed?
> Oh, !*>&*$!
> Yes, but if they are removed other stuff will break, I can pretty much
> guarantee that.
> So how long away is the release?
> My gut feeling at present is to fix this after 1.33 goes out, but I could go
> either way I guess.
Currently, Tru64/CXX strict mode compilation is affected by this. So why
not just try it and if there are too much failures, revert it back?
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk