Re: [Boost-testing] pathscale 3.1 reporting problems?

Subject: Re: [Boost-testing] pathscale 3.1 reporting problems?
From: Steven Watanabe (watanabesj_at_[hidden])
Date: 2009-06-23 16:43:12

AMDG

K. Noel Belcourt wrote:
> Another try at diagnosing this problem (please disregard my previous 
> postings on this subject).
>
> On Jun 13, 2009, at 12:02 PM, Steven Watanabe wrote:
>
>> According to http://tinyurl.com/nunary, the test library fail to build,
>> but following the
>> link, it appears that the test library did build correctly.
>
> It seems that the pathscale-3.1 tuple another_tuple_test_bench test 
> failed to link for a lack of libboost_test_exec_monitor-31-d-1_40.a, 
> which itself failed to build because unit_test_main.o failed to compile.
>
> So there's two issues here.  First, I could use a little help figuring 
> out why unit_test_main.o fails to compile for pathscale-3.1.  The 
> second issue is parsing the nightly bjam.log output from the 
> pathscale-3.1 toolset seems to be rather messed up, though not sure 
> why at the moment (the parsing seems to work better with pathscale-3.2).
>
> Here's the compilation failure of unit_test_main.o.
>
>     "/usr/local/pathscale-3.1/bin/pathCC" -noinline -g -Wall 
> -DBOOST_ALL_NO_LIB=1 -I".." -c -o 
> "/var/scratch/boost/results/boost/bin.v2/libs/test/build/pathscale-3.1/debug/link-static/unit_test_main.o" 
> "../libs/test/src/unit_test_main.cpp"
>
> In file included from ../boost/test/utils/iterator/token_iterator.hpp:27,
>                  from ../boost/test/impl/unit_test_main.ipp:27,
>                  from ../libs/test/src/unit_test_main.cpp:16:
> ../boost/test/utils/named_params.hpp: In member function `ReferenceType
>    boost::nfp::named_parameter<T, unique_id,
>    RefType>::operator[](boost::nfp::keyword<unique_id, true>) const':
> ../boost/test/utils/named_params.hpp:190: error: syntax error before 
> `;' token

gcc-open64 seems to be having exactly the same problem.

The offending line is
    ref_type        operator[]( keyword<unique_id,true> ) const     { 
return m_erased ? nil_t::inst().any_cast<ref_type>() :  m_value; }

What happens if you change it to
ref_type        operator[]( keyword<unique_id,true> ) const     {
    if(m_erased) {
        return nil_t::inst().any_cast<ref_type>();
    } else {
        return m_value;
    }
}

In Christ,
Steven Watanabe