Subject: Re: [boost] [integer][math]Heads up on revised gcd/lcm code
From: Edward Diener (eldiener_at_[hidden])
Date: 2017-04-29 18:57:52
On 4/29/2017 1:49 PM, John Maddock via Boost wrote:
>> Sorry about the multiple posts. I have been having some trouble with
>> Thunderbird. I think it is fixed now.
> No problem, for some reason I lost all boost messages for a couple of
Something apparently happened to everybody, where the mailing lists
stopped working along with the GMane reflection. Everything seems to be
> but I see from the archives you replied as below:
> >With 12.3 I see:
> >I can not see why it fails to compile and no reason seems to be given.
> It's a compile-fail test, which compiles when it should not - as I
> understand it, it tries to create a 65-bit integer which should of
> course fail.
> I assume it's a compiler bug, but either way, nothing has changed in
> that code for years.
> >With 12.2 I still see:
> >"../../../boost/cstdint.hpp", line 381: Error: uintptr_t is not defined.
> >1 Error(s) detected.
> That's weird, it should have been fixed in
> - solaris.hpp unconditionally defines BOOST_HAS_STDINT_H so that
> pp-branch should only be taken when INTPTR_MAX is defined and ::intptr
> actually exists. Or are you on red-hat?
I am on Linux ( Fedora 25 ), not Solaris. I will look at it and see what
I can figure out.
> In which case are you able to
> figure out why that pp-branch is taken?
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk