Re: [boost] [chrono] New Features + Bug fixes + Updateddocumentation

Subject: Re: [boost] [chrono] New Features + Bug fixes + Updateddocumentation
From: vicente.botet (vicente.botet_at_[hidden])
Date: 2009-12-11 17:34:48

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Howard Hinnant" <howard.hinnant_at_[hidden]>
To: <boost_at_[hidden]>
Sent: Friday, December 11, 2009 6:21 PM
Subject: Re: [boost] [chrono] New Features + Bug fixes + Updateddocumentation

> 
> On Dec 11, 2009, at 12:04 PM, vicente.botet wrote:
> 
>> Hi,
>> ----- Original Message ----- 
>> From: "Howard Hinnant" <howard.hinnant_at_[hidden]>
>> To: <boost_at_[hidden]>
>> Sent: Friday, December 11, 2009 5:20 PM
>> Subject: Re: [boost] [chrono] New Features + Bug fixes + Updateddocumentation
>> 
>> 
>>> 
>>> On Dec 11, 2009, at 3:37 AM, vicente.botet wrote:
>>> 
>>>> There is yet an error with gcc-4.4.0
>>>> 
>>>> ./boost/chrono/chrono.hpp:945: error: declaration of 'typedef class boost::chrono::duration<long long int, boost::ratio<1ll, 10000000ll> > boost::chrono::system_clock::duration'
>>>> ./boost/chrono/chrono.hpp:458: error: changes meaning of 'duration' from 'class boost::chrono::duration<long long int, boost::ratio<1ll, 10000000ll> >'
>>>> 
>>>> Note that the line numbers will be no more significant. It corresponds to the following
>>>> 
>>>> namespace chrono {
>>>> 
>>>>   template <class Rep, class Period>
>>>>   class duration
>>>>   {...}
>>>> 
>>>> class BOOST_CHRONO_DECL system_clock
>>>> {
>>>> public:
>>>>     typedef BOOST_SYSTEM_CLOCK_DURATION          duration;
>>>>   ...
>>>> };
>>>> }
>>>> 
>>>> where
>>>> 
>>>> #ifdef BOOST_CHRONO_WINDOWS_API
>>>> // The system_clock tick is 100 nanoseconds
>>>> # define BOOST_SYSTEM_CLOCK_DURATION duration<boost::int_least64_t, ratio<BOOST_INTMAX_C(1), BOOST_INTMAX_C(10000000)> >
>>>> #else
>>>> # define BOOST_SYSTEM_CLOCK_DURATION boost::chrono::nanoseconds
>>>> #endif
>>> 
>>> Try qualifying "duration" with "chrono::" in BOOST_SYSTEM_CLOCK_DURATION:
>>> 
>>> # define BOOST_SYSTEM_CLOCK_DURATION chrono::duration<boost::int_least64_t, ...
>> 
>> This could help if the warning was for windows API, but unfortunately it was reported be gcc-4.4.0 and also by  gcc-4.3.4 :(
> 
> Try a preprocess (-E) and make sure system_clock looks the way you think it should.  This could be a configuration error.  I just copy/pasted your sandbox chrono.hpp into a test file and compiled it fine using gcc-4.4.0.

Oh, I see. Tom Tam could be building on MinGW with gcc-4.4.0. I have sent him a mail to request your  suggestion.

BTW, gcc-4.3.4 didn't had the error on cygwin.

Thanks,
Vicente

P.S. I think that I will need to install MinGW on my PC.