From: Markus Schöpflin (markus.schoepflin_at_[hidden])
Date: 2008-08-04 03:27:28
we still should come to a decision regarding this issue. Can't we just make
the change and check if there are any new test failures caused by it?
Markus Schöpflin wrote:
> Daryle Walker wrote:
>> What happens on systems, like mine, that already have sufficient
>> recursive depth? Will specifying a maximum lower that the default
>> actually lower the setting? If so, then this addition could be
> If your toolset supports setting the recursion depth (gcc, qcc, acc, and
> hp_cxx at the moment), it will be set to the value specified. So yes, it
> might lower the default setting.
> But why should this be dangerous? The recursion depth needed to compile
> a program is independent of the toolset, isn't it? So if for a given
> compiler a value lower than the default value is used, there should be
> no harm.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk