Yep that works thanks
On 12 October 2016 at 18:25, Ashley Retallack <[email protected]> wrote: > cool I'll give it a go and let you know. > > Ash > > > On 12 October 2016 at 17:50, Larry Gritz <[email protected]> wrote: > >> No, don't trouble yourself. Instead, I would appreciate if you could try >> applying this patch (to the current RB-1.7 head): >> >> diff --git a/CMakeLists.txt b/CMakeLists.txt >> index 00c51cf..5c22704 100644 >> --- a/CMakeLists.txt >> +++ b/CMakeLists.txt >> @@ -147,6 +147,10 @@ if (CMAKE_COMPILER_IS_CLANG OR >> CMAKE_COMPILER_IS_APPLECLANG) >> APPLECLANG_VERSION_STRING VERSION_GREATER 6.1) >> add_definitions ("-Wno-unused-local-typedefs") >> endif () >> + if (CLANG_VERSION_STRING VERSION_EQUAL 3.9 OR CLANG_VERSION_STRING >> VERSION_GREATER 3.9) >> + # Don't warn about using unknown preprocessor symbols in #if'set >> + add_definitions ("-Wno-expansion-to-defined") >> + endif () >> endif () >> >> >> >> I don't have 3.9 installed, so I can't easily test it myself. >> >> This should at least disable the warnings, and then we can fix the code >> at our leisure, ideally waiting until after homebrew adds a llvm39 package >> so it's easy for me to test as I go. >> >> If this works for you, I'll merge it. >> >> >> On Oct 12, 2016, at 9:37 AM, Ashley Retallack <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >> Cool, >> >> Well I can start looking in to it if you like in the mean time I'll use >> a lower version. >> >> Cheers >> >> Ash >> >> On 12 October 2016 at 16:15, Larry Gritz <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> I haven't tried clang 3.9 (though I use 3.8 regularly). >>> >>> Ugh, that's unfortunate. There are many places where we say things like >>> >>> #if A_SOMETIMES_DEFINED > 3 >>> >>> instead of the more verbose >>> >>> #if defined(A_SOMETIMES_DEFINED) && A_SOMETIMES_DEFINED > 3 >>> >>> I used to think the former was illegal but recently discovered that all >>> the compilers seem to accept it without complaint and figured maybe it was >>> fine all along and it was my understanding of C++ that was wrong. So I got >>> in the habit of preferring this compact form and using it frequently. But >>> this error implies that it was wrong all along and the compilers were very >>> forgiving, but perhaps in the ever-tightening warning landscape it has >>> finally fallen. >>> >>> We'll need to scour the whole codebase for constructs like that and >>> replace them with the wordier version. >>> >>> Thanks for the alert. >>> >>> > On Oct 12, 2016, at 7:27 AM, Ashley Retallack < >>> [email protected]> wrote: >>> > >>> > Hi all, >>> > >>> > Was wondering if anyone has tried building oiio 1.7 with clang 3.9.0. >>> > >>> > I've been trying and get the following: >>> > >>> > src/include/OpenImageIO/hash.h:54:37: error: macro expansion >>> producing 'defined' has undefined behavior >>> > [-Werror,-Wexpansion-to-defined] >>> > #if OIIO_CPLUSPLUS_VERSION >= 11 || OIIO_MSVS_AT_LEAST_2013 >>> > >>> > I can successfully build with gcc 4.8.4, just wanted to try and get >>> clang working. >>> > >>> > Any help much appreciated. >>> > >>> > Ash >>> > _______________________________________________ >>> > Oiio-dev mailing list >>> > [email protected] >>> > http://lists.openimageio.org/listinfo.cgi/oiio-dev-openimageio.org >>> >>> -- >>> Larry Gritz >>> [email protected] >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Oiio-dev mailing list >>> [email protected] >>> http://lists.openimageio.org/listinfo.cgi/oiio-dev-openimageio.org >>> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Oiio-dev mailing list >> [email protected] >> http://lists.openimageio.org/listinfo.cgi/oiio-dev-openimageio.org >> >> >> -- >> Larry Gritz >> [email protected] >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Oiio-dev mailing list >> [email protected] >> http://lists.openimageio.org/listinfo.cgi/oiio-dev-openimageio.org >> >> >
_______________________________________________ Oiio-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openimageio.org/listinfo.cgi/oiio-dev-openimageio.org
