Boost logo

Boost :

From: John Maddock (john_at_[hidden])
Date: 2006-04-06 05:35:27

> This causes a problem for standards-compliant compilers because,
> depending on where you enter the cycle, some template's declaration
> will not be seen before it is used. For example, entering at
> is_scalar.hpp (which happens when you include optional.hpp) causes the
> definition of is_class<> to be seen before the declaration of
> is_scalar<>, but the former uses the later.
> The problem was introduced in the change from 1.32 to 1.33, when
> is_abstract.hpp started being #included by is_convertible.hpp.
> For reasons I still don't fully understand, this doesn't always
> actually cause a problem. I think it has to do with the mysterious
> BOOST_NO_IS_ABSTRACT macro; my understanding of the intricacies of
> Boost configuration is very limited. The place I ran into this was
> using an EDG-based front end to parse the preprocessed output of Sun
> CC 5.7 on solaris-sparc; input is "#include <boost/optional.hpp>";
> using Boost 1.33.0 or 1.33.1. I can't repro on linux or with gcc, nor
> with the latest CVS version of Boost.
> But regardless, the cycle is still present in the latest CVS, and
> cyclic header dependencies are usually a bug.

This has come up before: For any given specific compiler (the ones we know
about and support in Boost.Config) the dependency graph is not cyclic, but
is different from compiler to compiler.

However, when using a front end about which we know nothing, it's possible
to have a configuration setup that fools the code into doing the wrong
thing. Anyway, I'll change the config so that not setting
BOOST_NO_IS_ABSTRACT always takes a non-cyclic path.


Boost list run by bdawes at, gregod at, cpdaniel at, john at