Boost logo

Boost :

Subject: Re: [boost] [test]enable_if, etc. : was : ...multiprecision types ... for unit tests?
From: Christopher Kormanyos (e_float_at_[hidden])
Date: 2013-06-13 14:37:54

> Christopher Kormanyos <e_float <at>> writes: >> * OK for GCC 4.7.2 >> * Errors for VC10 (ambiguous symbols), AKA VisualStudio 2010 >> * Errors for VC11 (ambiguous symbols), AKA VisualStudio 2012 >Sorry. I've misinterpreted MSVC output. I do see the error now. And... this >is really weird one. I did not see something like this in a long time. What >it comes to can be illustrated in this example: <snip code sample> >I'm sure it can be simplified further by removing specifics of >multiprecision library. And the offending line is ... the template >instantiation, in unrelated namespace HAS NOTHING TO DO with enable_if at >all. So if I understand, we are actually dealing with a compiler issue here regarding the proper resolution of namespaces. Is that what you are saying? <snip> >Any hints are welcome. >Gennadiy I think it would be best to qualify enable_if and disable_if with the boost namespace in multiprecision. John, what is you opinion? But you are right in principle, it seems to be a compiler issue. I apologize for wrongly involving your code in this test case. Gennadiy, do you really want to go the hard road and use symbols inject enable_if, etc. in namespaces in your code. It just seems like playing with fire since this symbol has such a clear meaning in C++11. It's your decision, but it would scare me enough to create my_enable_if, etc. But again, it seems as though your code is right and MSVC is wrong. Just a tough waiting game on a compiler issue like that. Have we cleared this one up now? Should I investigate anything further? John, should we decorate multiprecision? No Hurry here, it's something for 1.55. Sincerely, Chris.

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