From: Fernando Cacciola (fernando_cacciola_at_[hidden])
Date: 2007-04-09 08:48:14
>> Fernando Cacciola wrote:
>>> I can test it with gcc (4.4.1) in a Debian Linux Box, but not today
>>> (8pm already here). And probably not until next Monday.
>> OK. I just did it, and it also works with gcc 4.4.1
> I'm certainly missing something. Clearly, the change you committed
> right before freeze changed a finite amount of files. What's wrong
> with reverting those files into the state they had immediately
> before your commit?
> While "I really hated the idea of going back to 2 headers" might
> be a good technical argument at a different time, do we really
> want to spend time trying yet another alternative solution
> at this point?
If it were just a matter of reverting N files to a previous version I
would just do it. But it isn't.
I need to revert 2 files, BUT ALSO
1.Manually edit-back "optional.hpp", which included "none_t.hpp" but now
2.Manually edit-back those test files which included "none.hpp"
explicitly and now they doesn't.
3.Manually re-edit the documentation to state that "none.hpp" must be
Granted, I can avoid 1,2 and 3 there by going back to the 2 headers but
keeping "optional.hpp" *updated*, that is, including "none.hpp".
But that renders the point of having two separate headers totally useless.
I totally understand that doing a last minute fix which delays the
release even longer is annoying, but IMHO is even more annoying to
release something knowing it has a problem just because we don't want to
spend a few additional days clearing up anything that may leak after the
fix. I'm afraid that's just the way our industry works, but I don't but
Also, unlike the problematic in-a-rush fix that caused the problem
before, I've given this fix a lot of attention, and it comes with a
test, so I could tested it locally on 3 different platforms and I will
test it on a fourth today.
And finally, Thomas is off until Wednesday anyway, so what's the point
in rushing just now when we can do whatever it takes to make sure this
fix will really work?
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk