From: Martin Wille (mw8329_at_[hidden])
Date: 2007-04-13 01:46:01
Abdelmorhit El Rhazi wrote:
> Thanks guys.
> Please find my answers to your questions :
> 1- Possibly he's using a 1.33.1 release on Windows and a CVS version on Linux
> -->I connect to a remote machine in which I do not have admin right. So, I used
> the default boost library. I did not download and install the newest version of
> boost. May be this is the cause. If you think so, how can I verify the version
> that are this machine. Any idea.
> 2- What is gcc -v saying?
> ----> Here is the display of that command:
> Reading specs from /usr/lib/gcc-lib/i386-redhat-linux/3.3.2/specs
> Configured with: ../configure --prefix=/usr --mandir=/usr/share/man
> --infodir=/usr/share/info --enable-shared --enable-threads=posix
> --disable-checking --with-system-zlib --enable-__cxa_atexit
> Thread model: posix
> gcc version 3.3.2 20031022 (Red Hat Linux 3.3.2-1)
Pointless, as I said before.
> 3- That this error didn't become apparent und VC++ might have been caused
> by some compiler settings (precompiled headers, maybe?).
> ---> What do you mean ?
If you switch your compiler (VC++) to a mode that is not compliant to
the C++ standard and the compiler accepts some code then that doesn't
indicate whether the code is correct.
The header, as has been pointed out clearly, lacks include guards. So
gcc is *correcly* complaining if that header gets included multiple
times. At that point, there's no point in discussing the version number
of a compiler that emits a seemingly correct error message. Any
suggestion to upgrade the compiler to fix that error a misleading.
You may want to upgrade your compiler anyway. The version number seems
to indicate one of that homebrew compilers from Red Hat, which used to
come with a lot of (unrelated) problems in the past.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk