Eric Lemings wrote:
Rather than having malloc() function calls scattered throughout the test
driver, I was wondering if a conventional malloc() wrapper wouldn't take
care of a lot of this error checking and null pointer dereference
warnings. A conventional Unix malloc() wrapper checks the retu
Farid Zaripov wrote:
From: Travis Vitek [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: dev@stdcxx.apache.org
Suject: RE: svn commit: r650902 - /stdcxx/trunk/src/num_put.cpp
With just a quick review, this change looks a bit suspicious. The
respective overloads for type double are all defined within
conditional
Travis Vitek wrote:
Thanks for the careful review!
Eric Lemings wrote:
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Author: faridz
Date: Wed Apr 23 08:20:07 2008
New Revision: 650902
URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=650902&view=rev
Log:
2008-04-2
> From: Travis Vitek [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> To: dev@stdcxx.apache.org
> Suject: RE: svn commit: r650902 - /stdcxx/trunk/src/num_put.cpp
>>With just a quick review, this change looks a bit suspicious. The
>>respective overloads for type double are all defined within
>>conditional-compile dire
>Travis Vitek wrote:
>
>The overloads on double are in platform specific #ifdef blocks because
>they have platform specific code in them (_finite, finite,
>isfinite). At
>least that is the only reason I see for it. So I don't really see the
>overloads on float and double outside of platform spe
> Eric Lemings wrote:
>
>
>> -Original Message-
>> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>
>> Author: faridz
>> Date: Wed Apr 23 08:20:07 2008
>> New Revision: 650902
>>
>> URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=650902&view=rev
>> Log:
>> 2008-04-23 Farid Zaripov <[EMAIL
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Wednesday, April 23, 2008 9:21 AM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: svn commit: r650902 - /stdcxx/trunk/src/num_put.cpp
>
> Author: faridz
> Date: Wed Apr 23 08:20:07 2008
> New Revision: 650902
>
> URL:
Eric Lemings wrote:
Interesting. I'll fix it pronto.
NBD. The other tests have been failing too (and we'll need to fix
them at some point in the near future) but this error looks new
to me.
In general though, do these compilers expect templates and
specializations
to not have a storage cla
> -Original Message-
> From: Martin Sebor [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Martin Sebor
> Sent: Wednesday, April 23, 2008 11:03 AM
> To: dev@stdcxx.apache.org
> Subject: errors compiling 22.locale.synopsis.cpp
>
> The new test fails to compile with most compilers, including IBM
>
Interesting. I'll fix it pronto.
In general though, do these compilers expect templates and
specializations
to not have a storage class?
Brad.
> -Original Message-
> From: Martin Sebor [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Martin Sebor
> Sent: Wednesday, April 23, 2008 11:03 AM
> To:
Scott Zhong wrote:
Aix-5.3-ppc, one of the machine has become unstable.
Hpux 11.23, build timed out due to massively long duration.
Linux_suse-9.1-amd64 11s, please take a look at this one Martin.
I'm a step ahead of you! ;-) I actually noticed the compilation
errors yesterday and checked in
Aix-5.3-ppc, one of the machine has become unstable.
Hpux 11.23, build timed out due to massively long duration.
Linux_suse-9.1-amd64 11s, please take a look at this one Martin.
Farid Zaripov wrote:
From: Martin Sebor от имени Martin Sebor
To: dev@stdcxx.apache.org
Subject: Re: svn commit: r650933 - /stdcxx/trunk/src/num_put.cpp
URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=650933&view=rev
Log:
2008-04-23 Farid Zaripov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
STDCXX-880
* src/num
> From: Martin Sebor от имени Martin Sebor
> To: dev@stdcxx.apache.org
> Subject: Re: svn commit: r650933 - /stdcxx/trunk/src/num_put.cpp
>
>> URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=650933&view=rev
>> Log:
>> 2008-04-23 Farid Zaripov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>>
>> STDCXX-880
>> * src/nu
The new test fails to compile with most compilers, including IBM
XLC++, Sun C++, MSVC, and HP aCC. It fails to link with Intel C++.
Here's the aCC error:
aCC -c -I$(TOPDIR)/include -I$(BUILDDIR)/include
-I$(TOPDIR)/tests/include -AA +O2 +w +W392,655,684,818,819,849
+W2193,2236,2261,2340
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Author: faridz
Date: Wed Apr 23 09:25:44 2008
New Revision: 650933
URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=650933&view=rev
Log:
2008-04-23 Farid Zaripov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
STDCXX-880
* src/num_put.cpp [_RWSTD_DBL_SIZE == _RWSTD_LDBL_SIZE]: Call doub
> -Original Message-
> From: Martin Sebor [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Martin Sebor
> Sent: Wednesday, April 23, 2008 9:10 AM
> To: dev@stdcxx.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Binary compatibility test results for Sun C++
> 5.8 on Solaris 8 and 10 platforms
>
...
>
> It might all b
Eric Lemings wrote:
-Original Message-
From: Martin Sebor [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Martin Sebor
Sent: Tuesday, April 22, 2008 5:49 PM
To: dev@stdcxx.apache.org
Subject: Re: Binary compatibility test results for Sun C++
5.8 on Solaris 8 and 10 platforms
Eric Lemings wro
Rather than having malloc() function calls scattered throughout the test
driver, I was wondering if a conventional malloc() wrapper wouldn't take
care of a lot of this error checking and null pointer dereference
warnings. A conventional Unix malloc() wrapper checks the return value
and just prin
> -Original Message-
> From: Martin Sebor [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Martin Sebor
> Sent: Tuesday, April 22, 2008 5:49 PM
> To: dev@stdcxx.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Binary compatibility test results for Sun C++
> 5.8 on Solaris 8 and 10 platforms
>
> Eric Lemings wrote:
> >
20 matches
Mail list logo
