From: Vladimir Prus (ghost_at_[hidden])
Date: 2006-08-25 03:06:52
On Tuesday 22 August 2006 15:21, you wrote:
> Vladimir Prus <ghost_at_[hidden]> writes:
> > On Thursday 13 July 2006 02:44, David Abrahams wrote:
> >> I also note this:
> >> # NOTES:
> >> # - V1 had logic to force intel to use gcc's runtime.
> >> # Note sure why that was needed, with icc 8.0 extensions
> >> # built with intel are loaded by python without problems.
> >> Has the version of Python also been built with Intel? If so you won't
> >> see any problems, as the following v1 comment indicates:
> >> # Normally on Linux, Python is built with GCC. A "poor QOI choice"
> >> # in the implementation of the intel tools prevents the use of
> >> # intel-linked shared libs by a GCC-built executable unless they
> >> # have been told to use the GCC runtime. This rule adds the
> >> # requisite flags to the compile and link lines.
> > Sorry for continuing being dense, but I can't find any outstanding
> > failures in Python tests on intel-9.0 (Martin Wille V2). So:
> > - is this problem fixed in 9.0
> I don't know.
> > - is there any test that would have caught this problem and that I can
> > run with intel 8.0 to check?
> I don't know.
> It may be (in fact it's likely) that Intel and GCC once had slight ABI
> differences but have since converged.
So, do you think it would be wise not to spend time on addressing a problem
that does not show up in regression tests, and for which it's not know how to
make Boost.Python fail?
Boost-Build list run by bdawes at acm.org, david.abrahams at rcn.com, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk