On 7 October 2012 04:10, leif <not.rea...@online.de> wrote: <SNIP>
> On Linux IA64 (SLES 10, Itanium) in contrast, I got the following failures: > > With the (fairly old) "native" GCC 4.1.2, building the testsuite fails: > > make[4]: Entering directory > `/home/leif/src/mpir-2.6.0-alpha1-build.iras-gcc-4.1.2/tests/cxx' > g++ -DHAVE_CONFIG_H -I. -I../../../mpir-2.6.0-alpha1/tests/cxx -I../.. > -I../../../mpir-2.6.0-alpha1 -I../../../mpir-2.6.0-alpha1/tests -O2 -c -o > t-assign.o ../../../mpir-2.6.0-alpha1/tests/cxx/t-assign.cc > ../../../mpir-2.6.0-alpha1/mpirxx.h:1587: error: ‘__gmp_expr<__mpz_struct > [1], __mpz_struct [1]>::__gmp_expr(intmax_t)’ cannot be overloaded > ../../../mpir-2.6.0-alpha1/mpirxx.h:1578: error: with > ‘__gmp_expr<__mpz_struct [1], __mpz_struct [1]>::__gmp_expr(long int)’ > ../../../mpir-2.6.0-alpha1/mpirxx.h:1588: error: ‘__gmp_expr<__mpz_struct > [1], __mpz_struct [1]>::__gmp_expr(uintmax_t)’ cannot be overloaded > ../../../mpir-2.6.0-alpha1/mpirxx.h:1579: error: with > ‘__gmp_expr<__mpz_struct [1], __mpz_struct [1]>::__gmp_expr(long unsigned > int)’ > ../../../mpir-2.6.0-alpha1/mpirxx.h:1656: error: ‘__gmp_expr<__mpz_struct > [1], __mpz_struct [1]>& __gmp_expr<__mpz_struct [1], __mpz_struct > [1]>::operator=(intmax_t)’ cannot be overloaded > ../../../mpir-2.6.0-alpha1/mpirxx.h:1647: error: with > ‘__gmp_expr<__mpz_struct [1], __mpz_struct [1]>& __gmp_expr<__mpz_struct > [1], __mpz_struct [1]>::operator=(long int)’ > ../../../mpir-2.6.0-alpha1/mpirxx.h:1657: error: ‘__gmp_expr<__mpz_struct > [1], __mpz_struct [1]>& __gmp_expr<__mpz_struct [1], __mpz_struct > [1]>::operator=(uintmax_t)’ cannot be overloaded > ../../../mpir-2.6.0-alpha1/mpirxx.h:1648: error: with > ‘__gmp_expr<__mpz_struct [1], __mpz_struct [1]>& __gmp_expr<__mpz_struct > [1], __mpz_struct [1]>::operator=(long unsigned int)’ <SNIP> OK, I took a look at this and basically an intmax_t and long int are the same thing on this machine (as are a uintmax_t and unsigned long int). Thus it is effectively trying to overload the __gmp_exp function twice with the same type but different implementations (one calls the si function, the other calls the sx function). This is a problem for which I don't personally know the solution at present. Any suggestions would be very helpful. Bill. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "mpir-devel" group. To post to this group, send email to mpir-devel@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to mpir-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/mpir-devel?hl=en.
