Subject: Re: [boost] Clang 4.0.0 MPL error in Boost next.hpp and prior.hpp
From: Paul A. Bristow (pbristow_at_[hidden])
Date: 2017-03-26 08:38:14
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Boost [mailto:boost-bounces_at_[hidden]] On Behalf Of Peter Dimov via Boost
> Sent: 26 March 2017 00:52
> To: boost_at_[hidden]
> Cc: Peter Dimov
> Subject: Re: [boost] Clang 4.0.0 MPL error in Boost next.hpp and prior.hpp
> Edward Diener wrote:
> > Try running all the Boost PP tests <g>. I would be very surprised if they
> > worked in -fno-ms-compatibility mode. I will try it myself with clang
> > targeting VC++ using clang-win.
> Even if all the PP tests don't pass, if what MPL needs works, that would at
> least solve Paul's immediate problem. (And not only his, I suppose.)
My current needs are indeed quite simple (and might be circumnavigated by removing use of float_distance.hpp (thus next.hpp)
checking the generation of some simple numerical code.
So I'll give that all a try.
I remain still confused as to what controls the choice of clang-linux and clang-win, and what needs to switched. Perhaps trying to
use some of the features in
will enlighten me.
With the compatibility mode on, and providing an include to the MSVC cstddef, I still get references to clang-linux. So does this
mean that I am/should be using mingw cstddef and libstd++ for STL?
I'm very grateful for the all thought and work going into this meanwhile.
Does all this mean that I would be better off getting the very newest VS update? (A task that I need to do anyway sometime).
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk