Re: [boost] [Serialization] BOOST_CLASS_EXPORT regression on SunCC

Subject: Re: [boost] [Serialization] BOOST_CLASS_EXPORT regression on SunCC
From: Sohail Somani (sohail_at_[hidden])
Date: 2009-02-17 16:29:14

David Abrahams wrote:
> on Tue Feb 17 2009, Sohail Somani <sohail-AT-taggedtype.net> wrote:
>> That is strange. I distinctly remember it not working for g++ 4 for a while.
> 
> I remember something like that too.  However, IIRC, that problem was a
> simple case of stupid incorrect code on my part, that somehow happened to
> work on earlier compilers.  That had nothing to do with relying on
> compiler implementation details.
> 
> Yep: https://svn.boost.org/trac/boost/ticket/1711

This comes back to a question I had earlier which was: where in the
standard does it specify that looking up functions during ADL requires
instantiation of return types? If I could interpret a section in that
manner, then I can report a bug to Sun. I have verified that the type is
never instantiated.

>> Do you mean to distinguish between compilers Boost is supporting and
>> compilers Boost tests on? 
> 
> No I do not.  It was passing on all the compilers we tested on and/or I
> could get my hands on.

OK.

>> If so I'm not sure how helpful that is. In this case, tests that
>> passed before, no longer pass.
> 
> Please know exactly what you're saying before you make that claim for a
> third time.  I was *exceedingly* careful in testing these changes.
> Before we can know that I introduced a regression, we need to consider
> the original state of the code I checked in (since changed), the exact
> compilers that were available, and those we were testing on.

I did not mean to imply that you were not careful but wanted to be sure
about why you were explicit about supported compilers. That's why I said
"if so" :-)

Is there an archive of test results somewhere? That would make it easier
to track down when it stopped working.

> And again, the issue there has nothing to do with relying on
> implementation-specific hacks, and it wasn't reported until two years later
> (by you, incidentally).

I don't think that the change was done 3 years ago means anything. Just
that Boost used to take a long time to release and people are slow to
upgrade.

I thought it was kind of funny that I reported the same issue in two
different compilers. Unfortunately, no workaround or fix yet!

-- 
Sohail Somani
http://uint32t.blogspot.com