Somewhere in the E.U., le 14/08/2003 Bonjour
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Beman Dawes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > At 09:57 AM 8/13/2003, Hubert Holin wrote: > > >Somewhere in the E.U., le 13/08/2003 [SNIP] > >(in other words, > >Gcc 2.95.x might be out). > > > > At any rate, I only have CodeWarrior locally available for tests > >(but I will read the results of the various platform runs to fix > >things), so it might prove inconvenient for the "imminent" release. > > If there are new failures, is it OK if I try to fix them? I've got 8 > compilers, will have a pretty good idea if changes break anything. > > --Beman No problems at all! I have checked in yesterday a modified version (added guarded using directives at namespace level and ifdef them out of functions; did that a bit fast and perhaps not entirely in the best possible way) of quaternion_test.cpp and of octonion_test.cpp, where I believe lies the problem, but did *not* check in the modified special functions files, as the modification on these later files where not needed for the quaternions and octonions and might break things for Gcc 2.95.x. I will only check in the modified special functions files after the imminent release. This will pose a problem too, as a bug report filled via sourceforge for one of these files will therefore not be addressed in this release, but I find it a lesser evil, and it has the advantage of allowing me time (without causing any further delay to the impending release) to give valarray support to all existing special functions, beyond the one I have done (which is something I want before embarking on the new fonctions I promissed a while back), and hopefully to ifdef out the bits that could possibly upset Gcc 2.95.x. Merci HH _______________________________________________ Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost