Boost :

Date view	Thread view	Subject view	Author view

From: Markus Schöpflin (markus.schoepflin_at_[hidden])
Date: 2006-04-24 03:58:20

Next message: Vladimir Prus: "Re: [boost] [program_options] PATCH: fix VC8 runtime assertionerror in options_description.cpp"
Previous message: Ivan Vecerina: "Re: [boost] [property_tree review] Making the interface leaner, concretely..."
In reply to: Martin Wille: "Re: [boost] [bind] bind_visit_test failure on GCC 4.1.0 and HP/CXX"
Next in thread: Boris Gubenko: "[boost] is it a requirement to use V2 for 1.34 release?"
Reply: Boris Gubenko: "[boost] is it a requirement to use V2 for 1.34 release?"

Martin Wille wrote:

> Peter Dimov wrote:
>
>> It does, thanks. This is a bug in boost::bind that is exposed by two-phase
>> lookup. I fixed it in CVS HEAD. Not sure yet what to do with the 1.34 branch
>> as changes in boost::bind have a potential to break other things.
>
> Why does that bug get detected only on 64bit platforms? The bind tests
> pass for gcc 4.1.0 an Linux-x86. Shouldn't a two-phase lookup problem
> manifest itself on all platforms supported by gcc 4.1.0?

It failed for me on 32 bit linux and 64 bit alpha with gcc 4.1.0 on both
HEAD and the RC branch.

Markus

Next message: Vladimir Prus: "Re: [boost] [program_options] PATCH: fix VC8 runtime assertionerror in options_description.cpp"
Previous message: Ivan Vecerina: "Re: [boost] [property_tree review] Making the interface leaner, concretely..."
In reply to: Martin Wille: "Re: [boost] [bind] bind_visit_test failure on GCC 4.1.0 and HP/CXX"
Next in thread: Boris Gubenko: "[boost] is it a requirement to use V2 for 1.34 release?"
Reply: Boris Gubenko: "[boost] is it a requirement to use V2 for 1.34 release?"

Date view	Thread view	Subject view	Author view

Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk