Subject: Re: [boost] Boost 1.61.0 Release Candidate 1
From: Frank Mori Hess (fmh6jj_at_[hidden])
Date: 2016-05-06 12:29:54
On May 6, 2016 02:31, "Vladimir Prus" <vladimir.prus_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> I would guess Stephan is in better position to say whether it's indeed
> broken compiler - from his blog post it sounds like accurate
> of a broken/suboptimal specification.
The specification change is the removal of the converting constructor for
1-tuples. The thing is, signals2 never did any converting construction of
tuples. It was a straight copy construction of some templated function
arguments. The compiler error was using the converting tuple constructor
> Anyway, boost::signals2, boost::any and boost::variant seem like fairly
> parts of Boost, there are already two independent bug reports,
To be clear, the libraries are not completely broken even with the broken
compiler. It's just the specific case of a 1 argument signal whose
parameter type is a boost::any or similar. And the bug is not restricted
to boost, one of the tickets has a boost-free test case that demonstrates
the compiler's problem with 1-tuples.
> and having this
> problem on the most recent version of a popular compiler is somewhat
I agree it's somewhat embarrassing - for MSVC.
> If it can be solved by delaying the release by a day or so, it seems
Isn't the release already a week or so behind schedule?
> Do you see any reason why this commit might explode on master?
No I think it is a low risk commit. Sorry for the ranting, I'm done now,
carry on :)
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk