--- Comment #10 from rguenther at suse dot de 2010-05-07 08:39 ---
Subject: Re: PR36320 breaks boost
On Thu, 6 May 2010, knocte at gmail dot com wrote:
> --- Comment #9 from knocte at gmail dot com 2010-05-06 18:02 ---
> Hello.
>
> I'm in a position in which I cannot upgrade
--- Comment #9 from knocte at gmail dot com 2010-05-06 18:02 ---
Hello.
I'm in a position in which I cannot upgrade my Boost libraries right now.
So, is there a way that I can tell gcc to ignore this warning for now?
Thanks in advance.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?
--- Comment #8 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-12-05 12:20 ---
*** Bug 38161 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
---
--- Comment #7 from sam at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-10-09 20:39 ---
Note that this has been fixed in Boost SVN repository recently
(http://svn.boost.org/trac/boost/ticket/2069).
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=36453
--- Comment #6 from schwab at suse dot de 2008-10-09 14:46 ---
*** Bug 37781 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
schwab at suse dot de changed:
What|Removed |Added
-
--- Comment #5 from schwab at suse dot de 2008-09-14 08:08 ---
*** Bug 37518 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
schwab at suse dot de changed:
What|Removed |Added
-
--- Comment #4 from mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-07-07 09:25 ---
well, lets keep it at that for now
--
mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #3 from tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-07-06 03:25 ---
Sorry, I somehow missed the followup comment.
>> #elif defined(BOOST_PP_ITERATION_DEPTH) && BOOST_PP_ITERATION_DEPTH() == 1
The expression has to be valid after preprocessing.
So, if BOOST_PP_ITERATION_DEPTH is not
--- Comment #2 from mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-06-10 22:14 ---
so the code should be changed to
#elif defined(BOOST_PP_ITERATION_DEPTH) && BOOST_PP_ITERATION_DEPTH() == 1
?
it is confusing that #elif behaves more like "#if" and not like "#else\n#if"
--
http://gcc.gnu.org
--- Comment #1 from tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-06-06 20:23 ---
By my reading of the standard, issuing an error here is correct.
The restrictions on #elif are only lifted if it is in a skipped group.
But, in this case, it is not.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||tromey at redhat dot com
OtherBugsDependingO|
11 matches
Mail list logo