RE: [Boost-Users] boost::date_time::posix_time and Intel Compiler 7.0?

From: Ferdinand Prantl (ferdinand.prantl_at_[hidden])
Date: 2003-05-22 00:51:32

Hi Andre,

this is not only behavior of VC, all compilers, as far as I know have some
include/lib paths preconfigured, to prevent you from specifying them always
on command lines. You have two options how to use stlport:

1) #include <stlport/string>
      + STLport allows it and it does not clash with the VC STL and you can
do also some benchmarks... ;-)
       -  your code has hard-coded includes of STL headers and it is not
easy to switch STL then

2) #include <string>
      + your includes look standard for any compiler/STL
       -  your compiler must support replacing of its own ST with the
alternative one (STLport)

The 2) option you can achieve with VC by two ways:

a) do not rely on the built-in header/lib paths and provide them always on
the command line or environment (I'd recommend the latter...) - it is turned
on by the switch /useenv (VC7) or /env (VC6) and then you have to provide
your own paths e.g. in environment:

INCLUDE=D:\STLport-4.5.3;D:\STLport-4.5.3\stlport;D:\Program Files\Microsoft
Visual Studio .NET\Vc7\ATLMFC\INCLUDE;D:\Program Files\Microsoft Visual
Studio .NET\Vc7\INCLUDE;D:\Program Files\Microsoft Visual Studio
.NET\Vc7\PlatformSDK\include;D:\Program Files\Microsoft Visual Studio
.NET\FrameworkSDK\include;D:\Program Files\Microsoft Visual Studio
.NET\Vc7\PlatformSDK\include\prerelease

LIB=D:\STLport-4.5.3\lib;D:\Program Files\Microsoft Visual Studio
.NET\Vc7\LIB;D:\Program Files\Microsoft Visual Studio
.NET\Vc7\ATLMFC\LIB;D:\Program Files\Microsoft Visual Studio
.NET\Vc7\PlatformSDK\lib;D:\Program Files\Microsoft Visual Studio
.NET\FrameworkSDK\lib;D:\Program Files\Microsoft Visual Studio
.NET\Vc7\PlatformSDK\lib\prerelease

b) modify the paths in the VC's configuration - see the menu Tools/Options
Projects/VC++ Directories and put the path(s) to STLport into the three of
them: Include (for compiler), Library (for linker), Source (for debugger -
necessary only in VC6, VC7 uses absolute paths n PDBs)

I personally prefer 2) a) because if I do not want to compile everything on
my machine with STLport, it prevents me from still reconfiguring of VC
system paths and I can set the variables simply in a build batch for devenv
/build, and in a IDE-runing batch for tho work. Then I can easily test also
more versions of STLport. You can choose your favorite way,

   rgds,

       Ferda

-----Original Message-----
From: adutoit [mailto:adutoit_at_[hidden]] 
Sent: Wednesday, May 21, 2003 16:41
To: Boost-Users_at_[hidden]
Subject: Re: [Boost-Users] boost::date_time::posix_time and Intel Compiler
7.0?

I know I said I will not return soon, but I finally realised that stupid
Visual C++ is to blame for my original compilation error, not anyone from
Boost or the Intel compiler writer team.

For some reason, the order in which you specify include paths (for crying
out loud!) matters in Visual C++!!!

That means I must specify STLPort include path first, then stupid VC98
include path.  Now I am down to one compilation error, using my
much-reported compilation setup :

Compiling...
graph_qt.cpp
C:\PROGRAM FILES\BOOST_1_30_0\boost/lexical_cast.hpp(147): error: no
operator "<<" matches these operands
            operand types are: _STL::basic_stringstream<wchar_t,
_STL::char_traits<wchar_t>, _STL::allocator<wchar_t>> << const
_STL::basic_string<char, _STL::char_traits<char>, _STL::allocator<char>>
                  return stream << input;
                                ^
          detected during:
            instantiation of "bool={bool}
boost::detail::lexical_stream<Target, Source>::operator<<(const Source &)
[with Target=unsigned short, Source=_STL::basic_string<char,
_STL::char_traits<char>, _STL::allocator<char>>]" at line 192
            instantiation of "Target
boost::lexical_cast<Target,Source>(Source) [with Target=unsigned short,
Source=_STL::basic_string<char, _STL::char_traits<char>,
_STL::allocator<char>>]" at line 30 of "C:\PROGRAM
FILES\BOOST_1_30_0\boost/date_ti me/time_parsing.hpp"
            instantiation of "time_duration
boost::date_time::parse_delimited_time_duration<time_duration>(const
_STL::string &) [with time_duration=boost::posix_time::time_duration]"
compilation aborted for C:\home\adutoit\work\s3_qt\s3_qt\graph_qt.cpp (code
2)
Error executing cl.exe.

libs3_qt.lib - 1 error(s), 0 warning(s)

Any ideas? (Except for checking my include path specs again :) )

Greetings,
Andre
----- Original Message -----
From: "adutoit" <adutoit_at_[hidden]>
To: <Boost-Users_at_[hidden]>
Sent: Wednesday, May 21, 2003 4:16 PM
Subject: Re: [Boost-Users] boost::date_time::posix_time and Intel Compiler
7.0?

> Right; here are my compiler options, build configuration and the rest.
>
> Basically I am building a static library, which depends on some 
> in-house software components, Qt and Boost. Our own library S3FC (), 
> uses templates in such a manner as to make MSVC6 very unhappy.  
> Therefore we use the Intel compiler under M$. Needless to say, our 
> software compiles problemfree with GCC.  For the aforementioned and 
> other reasons we do not make use of Microsoft Foundation Classes when 
> compiling under Windoze, but use the latest version of STLPort (which 
> has been at the same version level for
some
> time now).
>
> Anyway; our Windows development work takes place under Visual C++ but 
> with the Intel compiler (version 7.0) selected instead of the MSVC6 
> compiler.
>
> OK; with this background then, here is the basic Visual C++ project
settings
> for my build of the above-mentioned library.  I have removed include 
> paths etc. which point to in-house
> software:
>
> 1) "Not Using MFCC" selected for general project settings (as 
> explained above).
> 2) Warning level => 3
>     Optimizations => Maximise Speed
>      Debug info => None
> 3)  Project Options =>
>     /nologo /ML /W3 /GR /GX /O2 /D "NDEBUG" /D "DEP_MS_WIN" /D "WIN32" 
> /D "_WINDOWS" /U "QT_NO_STL" /Fp"Release/libs3_qt.pch" /YX 
> /Fo"Release/" /Fd"Release/"
/FD
> /c
>
> The include and library paths for STLPort is set somewhere else, but 
> these are basically the options.
>
> If anyone knows of any special project options, preprocessor 
> directives I
am
> perhaps missing for building Boost-related projects with the Intel
compiler,
> please let me know!
> I suspect that we will soon be using Boost for other functionality 
> besides that provided by date_time at the moment.  Besides, I like the 
> library and works in our main development environment, Linux with the 
> GCC compiler.
>
> OK, I am forgetting about this problem for a day or two... Thanks to 
> everyone who has provided me with help so far, especially Jeff 
> Garland.
>
> Greetings,
> Andre.
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Jeff Garland" <jeff_at_[hidden]>
> To: <Boost-Users_at_[hidden]>
> Sent: Wednesday, May 21, 2003 3:42 PM
> Subject: RE: [Boost-Users] boost::date_time::posix_time and Intel 
> Compiler 7.0?
>
>
> >
> > > Anyway; it just irks me that I should have issues with 'standard'
stuff,
> > > like streaming operators.
> > > And the fact that the same code compiles with MSVC6 and NOT the 
> > > Intel compiler.
> >
> > Ok.
> >
> > > Back on the #define which started my woes.  The fact of the matter 
> > > is,
I
> get
> > > everything compiled when using MSVC6 and not the Intel compiler! 
> > > I.e. the MSVC6-specific code works, the 'other' compiler code for 
> > > the supposedly more Boost-compliant/friendly Intel compiler does 
> > > not.
> >
> > I guess I was thinking that what was happening is that when 
> > compiling with Intel you were getting the MSVC defined and hence 
> > were taking the non-generic code.  Perhaps not...
> >
> > Have you tried to run the tests in libs/date_time/test with your 
> > Intel/STLPort configuration?  That might help diagnose the issue. 
> > Also, it might be instructive to post your compile command.  Perhaps 
> > someone with experience on Intel can figure out why your 
> > configuration differs from the one that apparently passes the tests.
> >
> > > Could it be because I am using STLPort in conjunction with the 
> > > Intel compiler?
> >
> > Might be a factor.  There have been some issues before with the 
> > library configuration assuming MSVC limitations which don't apply 
> > with STLPort in the mix.
> >
> > > Aargh.  Just give me Linux and GCC...
> >
> > Agreed :-)
> >
> > Jeff
> >
> >
> >
> > Info: <http://www.boost.org>
> > Wiki: 
> > <http://www.crystalclearsoftware.com/cgi-bin/boost_wiki/wiki.pl>
> > Unsubscribe: <mailto:boost-users-unsubscribe_at_[hidden]>
> >
> >
> > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
> >
>
>
>
> Info: <http://www.boost.org>
> Wiki: <http://www.crystalclearsoftware.com/cgi-bin/boost_wiki/wiki.pl>
> Unsubscribe: <mailto:boost-users-unsubscribe_at_[hidden]>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to 
> http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>

------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ---------------------~--> Get
A Free Psychic Reading! Your Online Answer To Life's Important Questions.
http://us.click.yahoo.com/Lj3uPC/Me7FAA/uetFAA/EbFolB/TM
---------------------------------------------------------------------~->

Info: <http://www.boost.org>
Wiki: <http://www.crystalclearsoftware.com/cgi-bin/boost_wiki/wiki.pl>
Unsubscribe: <mailto:boost-users-unsubscribe_at_[hidden]>
 

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/