Boost logo

Boost :

Subject: Re: [boost] Boost SIMD beta release
From: Thorsten Ottosen (thorsten.ottosen_at_[hidden])
Date: 2012-12-21 05:11:38

On 20-12-2012 17:35, Andrey Semashev wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 20, 2012 at 8:17 PM, Thorsten Ottosen
> <thorsten.ottosen_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>> On 20-12-2012 15:09, Andrey Semashev wrote:
>>> The suggested approach has a nasty potential problem though. You have
>>> to be extra careful so that no common inline functions are compiled in
>>> different translation units with different compiler settings.
>>> Otherwise you may have ODR violation and it is unspecified which
>>> version of such functions end up in the compiled binary.
>> Well, is that different than other ODR violations?
> Not really, except that it's much more easier to get that problem.
>> We use bjam, so the settings are easy to make consistent across projects.
> Umm, I'm not sure you understood. The point was to compile different
> TUs with different compiler options (some with SSE enabled and others
> without).

Hm. I think I get it now. Sounds nasty indeed. Forget about using any
templated container in such TUs.


Boost list run by bdawes at, gregod at, cpdaniel at, john at