Re: [boost] [1.44] Beta progress?

Subject: Re: [boost] [1.44] Beta progress?
From: Robert Ramey (ramey_at_[hidden])
Date: 2010-07-26 00:49:30

John Maddock wrote:
>> I'm focused on getting past this current problem.  And
>> I think that implementing this suggestion is the only
>> practical way to do it.  I realize that this is a pain
>> but on the upside, it would make a huge improvement
>> to the mpi_archive at quite a small investment of
>> effort.
>
> I don't see how we can rewrite the archive class at this late stage...
>
> FYI: simply changing BOOST_ARCHIVE_STRONG_TYPEDEF to:
>
> #define BOOST_ARCHIVE_STRONG_TYPEDEF(T, D)         \
>    class D : public T {                           \
>    public:                                        \
>        explicit D(const T t) : T(t){}             \
>        D() : T() {}                               \
>    };                                             \
> /**/
>
> is sufficient to get MPI compiling with sun's compiler on Linux (this
> is on Trunk... I assume that both libraries have unmerged fixes
> awaiting for the release branch... as that looks hopelessly broken at
> present?).

<snip>

> But maybe this gives us a way forward for *this* release?  Perhaps
> with the proviso that Boost.Serialization is allowed to move forward
> and make breaking changes to it's implementation for the next release?
>
> Just my 2c worth... John.

OK, I can see how that might help. I can check in this
change.  Before doing this, I check the test matrix and
now see that the compile failures of the SUN compiler are gone
so now I'm not sure whether I should do this or not.

Mathias?

Robert Ramey