Re: [boost] [integer] Recent changes introduced failures on many platforms

From: Gubenko, Boris (boris.gubenko_at_[hidden])
Date: 2008-07-29 15:41:35

Markus Schöpflin wrote:
> As long as its only needed for running the regression tests,
> I'll just go ahead and modify the compiler parameters in my
> local configuration file.

Since setting CONTROL_FULL_COUNTS to zero fixes compilation error on HP-UX/aC++ also, would not it make sense to set the macro in the source -- integer_test.cpp -- for all affected compilers?

Thanks,
  Boris

> -----Original Message-----
> From: boost-bounces_at_[hidden]
> [mailto:boost-bounces_at_[hidden]] On Behalf Of Markus Schopflin
> Sent: Tuesday, July 29, 2008 4:47 AM
> To: boost_at_[hidden]
> Subject: Re: [boost] [integer] Recent changes introduced
> failures on many platforms
>
> Daryle Walker wrote:
> > On Jul 28, 2008, at 4:36 AM, Markus Schöpflin wrote:
> >
> >> Now I have the following issues:
> >>
> >> 1) I need to increase the maximum number of pending
> instantiations,
> >> it seems that the default value of the compiler (64) is
> not enough.
> >> This is also true for the acc toolset, AFAICT.
> >
> > That's the price of exhaustive testing.  Have you tried setting
> > CONTROL_FULL_COUNTS to 0?  (That preprocessor flag is made to be
> > overridable by your command-line parameters.)  That'll reduce the
> > number of bit-count cases to just 8 or so, but you might miss some
> > important cases (like bit-count == 0).
>
> As long as its only needed for running the regression tests,
> I'll just go ahead and modify the compiler parameters in my
> local configuration file.
>
> >> 2) I get a number of compile time errors along the lines of:
> >>
> >> cxx: Error: integer_test.cpp, line 623: expression must have a
> >> constant value
> >>           (exprnotconst)
> >>     BOOST_CHECK_EQUAL( static_cast<typename ----^
> >> cxx: Error: ../../../boost/integer.hpp, line 375: class
> >> "boost::maximum_unsigned_integral<<error-constant>>" has
> no member "type"
> >>           (notmember)
> >>           detected during instantiation of class
> >> "boost::uint_value_t<Value> [with Value=<error-constant>]" at line
> >> 623 of "integer_test.cpp"
> >>       typedef typename
> maximum_unsigned_integral<Value>::type  least;
> >> ---------------------------------------------------------^
> >>
> >> It looks like all EDG based compilers are flagging this error, see
> >> for example http://tinyurl.com/58s3zc.
> >
> > I've tried redoing how the compile-time integral constants are made.
> > Try out revision 47852.
>
> OK, it works now. All integer tests are passing for me.
>
> >
> >> 3) There are quite a few warning about truncation of
> values or sign
> >> changes, where I can't tell whether they are expected or not.
> >
> > I saw those in the same URL you gave.  Those tests are
> supposed to set
> > either the highest bit or the highest mantissa and/or sign
> bit, roll
> > off the highest bit in a shift while adding the old bit
> value back in,
> > then confirm that the value didn't change.  (If I missed
> the highest
> > bit, then it wouldn't roll off and the value will change.)  Any
> > compiler that warns about bits rolling off or transitioning between
> > the mantissa and sign areas will complain.
>
> OK, so these are to be expected and can be ignored.
>
> Thanks for your work,
> Markus
>
> _______________________________________________
> Unsubscribe & other changes:
> http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost
>