Re: [boost] [parameter] "Infinite" compile times withEDGbasedcompilers?

From: Boris Gubenko (Boris.Gubenko_at_[hidden])
Date: 2007-06-15 17:20:51

John Maddock wrote:

> Yep, I've tracked it down to the meta-programming rather than the
> preprocessing though.

It is a different problem then.

> No it's EDG version 3.06.  Strange.  When I get a chance I'll try
> the latest
> Intel-10 compiler (EDG 3.08) and see how that copes.

The problem may have nothing to do with EDG frontend and may
have everything to do with Intel's code generator. With icc 9.0
on Linux/ia64, it takes 13 secs. to compile. Long, but "at least
it gets there in the end :-)"

On HP-UX/ia64, both aCC A.06.15 and gcc 3.4.3 compile this
testcase in 5 secs.

Thanks,
  Boris

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "John Maddock" <john_at_[hidden]>
To: <boost_at_[hidden]>
Sent: Friday, June 15, 2007 1:49 PM
Subject: Re: [boost] [parameter] "Infinite" compile times withEDGbasedcompilers?

> Boris Gubenko wrote:
>>>>> I have a header that makes use of Boost.Parameter that basically
>>>>> takes forever to compile with the Intel compiler, and therefore
>>>>> presumably all EDG based front ends.
>>
>> There used to be a problem in EDG frontend with macro expansions
>> taking forever. It was reported years ago by a customer using Boost
>> on Tru64.
>> We've reported it to EDG and it has been fixed.
>
> Yep, I've tracked it down to the meta-programming rather than the
> preprocessing though.
>
>> aCC6 on HP-UX compiles testcase in
>> http://svn.boost.org/trac/boost/ticket/1054 in 7 seconds. This
>> compiler is using EDG Version 3.08.
>
> Slow, but OK.
>
>> cxx on Tru64 compiles it in ~20 sec. This compiler is using EDG
>> Version 3.04.
>
> Well at least it gets there in the end :-)
>
>> Perhaps, Intel compiler you are using is using some old version of
>> EDG fronend.
>
> No it's EDG version 3.06.  Strange.  When I get a chance I'll try the latest
> Intel-10 compiler (EDG 3.08) and see how that copes.  Either way, I think I
> now have a workaround that doesn't use Boost.Parameter at all, and will
> *hopefully* be faster to build with all compilers!
>
> Thanks for trying this out, John.
>
> _______________________________________________
> Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost
>
>