[Config] Boost config, long long in xlc 10.1

View: New views
3 Messages — Rating Filter:   Alert me  

[Config] Boost config, long long in xlc 10.1

by Ioannis Papadopoulos :: Rate this Message:

Reply to Author | View Threaded | Show Only this Message

Hi,

1. I see in config/compiler/vacpp.hpp that versions over 6 are not
supported when BOOST_ASSERT_CONFIG is defined:

#if (__IBMCPP_ > 600)
#  if defined(BOOST_ASSERT_CONFIG)
#     error "Unknown compiler version - please run the configure tests
and report the results"
#  endif
#endif

Still Boost compiles fine with 10.1, so maybe the number should be
changed to 1010, unless there is some other reason that I'm missing.


2. long long is supported through a flag, -qlonglong which also defines
_LONG_LONG to be 1. As far as I understand this is not taken into account.

Thanks!

_______________________________________________
Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost

Re: [Config] Boost config, long long in xlc 10.1

by John Maddock :: Rate this Message:

Reply to Author | View Threaded | Show Only this Message

> 1. I see in config/compiler/vacpp.hpp that versions over 6 are not
> supported when BOOST_ASSERT_CONFIG is defined:
>
> #if (__IBMCPP_ > 600)
> #  if defined(BOOST_ASSERT_CONFIG)
> #     error "Unknown compiler version - please run the configure tests
> and report the results"
> #  endif
> #endif
>
> Still Boost compiles fine with 10.1, so maybe the number should be
> changed to 1010, unless there is some other reason that I'm missing.

Fixed in Trunk and release branches.

> 2. long long is supported through a flag, -qlonglong which also defines
> _LONG_LONG to be 1. As far as I understand this is not taken into account.

Is this not already correctly detected in suffix.hpp via checking limits.h?

Cheers, John.

_______________________________________________
Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost

Re: [Config] Boost config, long long in xlc 10.1

by Ioannis Papadopoulos :: Rate this Message:

Reply to Author | View Threaded | Show Only this Message

John Maddock wrote:
>> 2. long long is supported through a flag, -qlonglong which also defines
>> _LONG_LONG to be 1. As far as I understand this is not taken into
>> account.
>
> Is this not already correctly detected in suffix.hpp via checking limits.h?
>
> Cheers, John.

You are right, my bad. It is handled correctly.

_______________________________________________
Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost