• Open Menu Close Menu
  • Apple
  • Shopping Bag
  • Apple
  • Mac
  • iPad
  • iPhone
  • Watch
  • TV
  • Music
  • Support
  • Search apple.com
  • Shopping Bag

Lists

Open Menu Close Menu
  • Terms and Conditions
  • Lists hosted on this site
  • Email the Postmaster
  • Tips for posting to public mailing lists
Re: Xcode vs. Boost
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Xcode vs. Boost


  • Subject: Re: Xcode vs. Boost
  • From: Mikkel Islay <email@hidden>
  • Date: Sun, 05 May 2013 18:27:43 +0200

HI Michael.

You are not telling us which compiler (frontend) and stdlib you are/have been using.
Additionally, 1.50.0 is no longer current as you probably know. SInce Clang is not a primary test compiler for Boost, I could easily imagine problems, as C++11-implemenation have been a moving target for both Clang/libc++ and Boost. In fact, according to the 1.53.0 release notes Boost is tested against "Clang from Subversion".

Mikkel


On 5 May 2013, at 17:48, Michael McLaughlin wrote:

I recently compiled an old project using Xcode 4.6.2 under OS 10.7.5. --> Everything OK.

However, this tool contains

#include "boost/math/special_functions.hpp"

and I updated my Boost installation to 1_50_0 from 1_44_0.  After the update, and after changing "search header paths" accordingly, I got 20 Clang errors, internal to Boost, starting in cons_fwd.hpp.  See arrows below:

#if !defined(BOOST_FUSION_CONS_FWD_HPP_INCLUDED)
#define BOOST_FUSION_CONS_FWD_HPP_INCLUDED

namespace boost { namespace fusion
{
    struct nil;  <-- Declaration of anonymous struct must be a definition

    template <typename Car, typename Cdr = nil> <-- Expected a type
    struct cons;
}}

#endif

Xcode is behaving as though Boost itself were broken (which seems unlikely).  Also, no variations on language or dialect seem to matter.

Any thoughts? Workarounds?

Thanks.

--
Michael McLaughlin


Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored. Xcode-users mailing list (email@hidden) Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription: This email sent to email@hidden
  • Follow-Ups:
    • Re: Xcode vs. Boost
      • From: Michael McLaughlin <email@hidden>
References: 
 >Xcode vs. Boost (From: Michael McLaughlin <email@hidden>)

  • Prev by Date: Re: Xcode vs. Boost
  • Next by Date: Re: Xcode vs. Boost
  • Previous by thread: Re: Xcode vs. Boost
  • Next by thread: Re: Xcode vs. Boost
  • Index(es):
    • Date
    • Thread