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
also I have
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.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk