Re: [boost] [1.44] Beta progress?

Subject: Re: [boost] [1.44] Beta progress?
From: Robert Ramey (ramey_at_[hidden])
Date: 2010-07-22 01:26:52

Robert Ramey wrote:
> Matthias Troyer wrote:
>
>>> If Matthias or Robert can fix the Sun compilation issues, I'll be
>>> quite content.
>>
>> Robert should be able to fix it by reintroducing default constructor
>> for his "strongly typedef'ed" classes, and by making one private
>> default constructor public again.
>
> Hmmm - I'm not so sure about that but I'll take a look at it.
>

I'm looking at this now. I see

item_version_type - private default constructor
version_type - private default constructor
class_id_type - public default constructor

I suspect that I made no conscious decision to make the private one private. 
I can make those public if you think that would help.  I don't see how it 
would though.

also I have

BOOST_ARCHIVE_STRONG_TYPEDEF(class_id_type, class_id_optional_type)

which has a public constructor of class_id_optional_type (which I suspect is 
the culprit).  Since
class_id_optional_type is derived from class_id_type (via strong_typedef), 
that would explain why class_id_type has a public default constructor and 
the other's don't.

If I'm understanding this correctly, we're dealing with a compilation error 
with the sun compiler whose error message has yet to be revealed to us. I 
think we need better information to know what the correct fix is.

Robert Ramey