> not subscribed to the flightgear-cvslogs ML ? ;-)
No, was not, but am now!
Thanks Fred.
Geoff.
--
Open Source Business Conference (OSBC), March 24-25, 2009, San Francisco, CA
-OSBC tackles the biggest issue in open
Geoff McLane a écrit :
>> Not that I have any objection to your patch, I just reacted to your
>> question that you have no idea how gcc can compile this.
>>
>
> So, I simply hope some patch is added to 'help' those of us using the
> MSVC compiler in native WIN32, under what ever switches are d
On Sun, Feb 22, 2009 at 7:46 PM, Geoff McLane wrote:
>
> Who is going to apply a patch?
Frederic has already applied it when he wrote his email.
--
Csaba/Jester
--
Open Source Business Conference (OSBC), March 24-25, 2
> Not that I have any objection to your patch, I just reacted to your
> question that you have no idea how gcc can compile this.
So, I simply hope some patch is added to 'help' those of us using the
MSVC compiler in native WIN32, under what ever switches are deemed
necessary, for whatever the reas
On Sun, Feb 22, 2009 at 6:26 PM, Geoff McLane wrote:
>
> template
> ForwardIterator lower_bound(
> ForwardIterator _First,
> ForwardIterator _Last,
> const Type& _Val,
> BinaryPredicate _Comp );
>
> And similarly for upper_bound ...
Yes. So the range _First to _Last is traversed, comparing i
On Sat, 2009-02-21 at 21:07 +0100, Csaba Halász wrote:
> On Sat, Feb 21, 2009 at 7:34 PM, Geoff McLane wrote:
> >
> > IMHO the _MSC_VER and _DEBUG switches do NOT need to be applied. I am
> > forever puzzled how gcc resolves this since the comparison is indeed two
> > pointers ...
>
> No it isn'
Csaba Halász a écrit :
> On Sat, Feb 21, 2009 at 7:34 PM, Geoff McLane wrote:
>
>> IMHO the _MSC_VER and _DEBUG switches do NOT need to be applied. I am
>> forever puzzled how gcc resolves this since the comparison is indeed two
>> pointers ...
>>
>
> No it isn't. Both uses in lower_bound
On Sat, Feb 21, 2009 at 7:34 PM, Geoff McLane wrote:
>
> IMHO the _MSC_VER and _DEBUG switches do NOT need to be applied. I am
> forever puzzled how gcc resolves this since the comparison is indeed two
> pointers ...
No it isn't. Both uses in lower_bound and upper_bound take an iterator
range and
Hi,
I have been applying this patch since sometime before Sep last year -
see -
http://geoffair.net/fg/txt/fgfs-047.patch.txt
IMHO the _MSC_VER and _DEBUG switches do NOT need to be applied. I am
forever puzzled how gcc resolves this since the comparison is indeed two
pointers ...
diff -ur CVS\F
Hi,
Compiling the file positioned.cxx with MSVC in debug model, it have some
problems.
but in release model , it have not.
I think that it is the problem of implementation of STL by Microsoft in debug
model.
So i add a method for class LowerLimitOfType, and it works.
I'd be happy if someone consi
- "黄志勇" a écrit :
> Sorry, in Microsoft Windows, there have not patch tool. I just can do
> like this.
If you use cvs :
cvs diff -u my_file.cxx
Or use TortoiseCVS to do the diff
-Fred
--
Frédéric Bouvier
http://my.fotolia.com/frfoto/ Photo gallery - album photo
http://fgsd.s
When compiling source code with MSVC 2005 in debug model, below two rows have
some problem.
=== two rows have problem ===
l = lower_bound(it->second.begin(), it->second.end(), aFilter->minType(),
LowerLimitOfType());
u = upper_bound(l, it->second.end(), aFilter->maxType(),
Lo
12 matches
Mail list logo
