Dear mentors, I am facing some troubles regarding boost wave and my package vera++.
It has been decided upstream to recompile boost wave with vera++ in order to activate the BOOST_WAVE_SUPPORT_MS_EXTENSIONS cxx flag so vera++ would be able to parse specific windows identifiers (__stdcall, __declspec, …). See issue #58¹. It is indeed nice for vera++ to be able to parse those identifiers correctly so a Debian server checking source files from windows developers would correctly report errors related to these tokens. For instance there are users of vera++ who runs a svn hook which refuses commits of source files with bad coding style. Now I have two choices. Either I remove the ability for vera++ to deal with these tokens on Debian and tell vera++ to use boost wave as shipped by Debian, or I ask the boost maintainers to add the BOOST_WAVE_SUPPORT_MS_EXTENSIONS flag for the compilation of boost wave. In the case I remove the functionality from vera++, maybe I could add a specific README.Debian file to tell users about this known issue. Yet shipping a degraded version of vera++ is kind of sad for Debian. What would be the best practice here? I have checked the bts if any demands regarding the BOOST_WAVE_SUPPORT_MS_EXTENSIONS compilation flag for boost wave have been asked in the past and could not find anything. Is there anything in Debian which could prevent the activation of this flag? Maybe this question should be directly asked in a bug report to libboostwave-dev? Thanks in advance for your kind help regarding this issue. Best regards, [1]: https://bitbucket.org/verateam/vera/issue/58/msext-token-with-different-type-between -- Vincent Hobeïka
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
