Boost logo

Boost :

Subject: Re: [boost] [core/noncopyable][test/boost::unit_test::singleton] massive test failures
From: John Maddock (boost.regex_at_[hidden])
Date: 2014-08-21 08:07:03

>> There's a problem with noncopyable and boost::unit_test::singleton in Intel
>> 13 for Linux in C++11 compatibility mode that's rippling through many
>> Boost libs. To list a few:
> This is already being solved:

Sort of... this fix depends on setting an undocumented and untested
config macro that was added while I wasn't paying attention. It raises
a whole host of questions frankly:

1) Why on earth is:

BOOST_CONSTEXPR noncopyable() = default;

Better than

noncopyable() {}

The latter with or without a BOOST_CONSTEXPR?

2) Are any of the new features of noncopyable tested - if there are
testable new features that is?

3) Should the undocumented/tested macro
disable the feature altogether (ie set
BOOST_NO_CXX11_DEFAULTED_FUNCTIONS) for these problem cases/compilers?

Finally, I note that comments on Github are all very well, but many
interested parties may miss the discussion altogether - we're all guilty
of this I realise - but it's important not to forget the mailing list -
so many thanks to Joaquin for raising this to wider awareness!

Cheers, John.

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