On Wed, 31 Jan 2007 23:26:06 + Ciaran McCreesh
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
| virtual/tr1-memory
| virtual/tr1-unordered-containers
| virtual/tr1-random
| virtual/tr1-regex
|
| Rather a lot of work, and rather icky...
Looking at this some more... We're probably talking about needing the
On 2007-01-30, Matthias Langer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
nope ... let's hope c++-0x comes out soon and that compiler vendors are
faster in implementing it than c++-98.
It's actually officially called (skipping all the admin stuff): C++09
That gives a good indication of when it is likely to
On Tue, 30 Jan 2007 11:11:20 -0500 (EST) Caleb Tennis
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
| * Hard dep upon boost. This sucks for g++-4.1 users.
|
| * Hard dep upon g++-4.1, which isn't available for all archs. This
| doesn't even work because there's no guarantee that =4.1 is being
| used even if it's
On Tue, 30 Jan 2007 10:47:09 -0600 Grant Goodyear [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
| * Hard dep upon g++-4.1, which isn't available for all archs. This
| doesn't even work because there's no guarantee that =4.1 is being
| used even if it's installed.
|
| I haven't done my homework, so I'll just ask:
Ciaran McCreesh a écrit :
* Hard dep upon boost. This sucks for g++-4.1 users.
* Hard dep upon g++-4.1, which isn't available for all archs. This
doesn't even work because there's no guarantee that =4.1 is being used
even if it's installed.
* || ( ) deps, and hope that if the user has 4.1
On Wed, 31 Jan 2007 23:36:33 +0100
Rémi Cardona [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Newbie idea : g++ and boost both provide virtual/tr1
Newbie question : besides the fact that you would have to rebuild
packages if you changed the virtual, is there anything painfully
obvious why that would be a bad
On Wed, 31 Jan 2007 23:24:31 + Stephen Bennett [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
| And what exactly is required of a package providing virtual/tr1? If it
| has to implement the entirity of the TR, then g++-4.1 can't provide
| the virtual and the purpose is lost since the most used parts of the
|
On Wed, Jan 31, 2007 at 11:24:31PM +, Stephen Bennett wrote:
On Wed, 31 Jan 2007 23:36:33 +0100
Rémi Cardona [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Newbie idea : g++ and boost both provide virtual/tr1
Newbie question : besides the fact that you would have to rebuild
packages if you changed the
On Wed, 31 Jan 2007 15:32:03 -0800 Brian Harring [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
| You're ignoring that new style virtuals can have versions; thus
| virtual/tr-[arbitrary version 1]
| can be 'almost full 1 support'.
Which means what, in terms of parts of tr1 that are and aren't supplied
by various
On Wed, Jan 31, 2007 at 11:38:04PM +, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
On Wed, 31 Jan 2007 15:32:03 -0800 Brian Harring [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
| You're ignoring that new style virtuals can have versions; thus
| virtual/tr-[arbitrary version 1]
| can be 'almost full 1 support'.
Which means
On Wed, 31 Jan 2007 16:00:49 -0800 Brian Harring [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
| On Wed, Jan 31, 2007 at 11:38:04PM +, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
| On Wed, 31 Jan 2007 15:32:03 -0800 Brian Harring
| [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
| | You're ignoring that new style virtuals can have versions; thus
| |
On Tue, 30 Jan 2007 08:41:56 +0100 Luca Barbato [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
| Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
| On Tue, 30 Jan 2007 08:30:40 +0100 Luca Barbato [EMAIL PROTECTED]
| wrote:
| | Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
| | What is the best way to handle packages that require parts of
| | tr1? The options
Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
bringing it up to 3.3MBytes of code, about 3.2MBytes of which is
compiler bug workarounds and boost-review-process-induced mutual
masturbation.
So the safest route is either bundle boost (that is heavy as you shown
in detail) and/or just depend on it at least for now.
On 30.01.2007, at 09:36, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
| * have the application bundle a static implementation and switch to
| system on at configure time as done for other libs?
At something like five megs of code per application?
If you make that decidable by a USE-flag like minimal?
Philipp
--
On Tue, 30 Jan 2007 11:36:35 +0200 Philipp Riegger
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
| On 30.01.2007, at 09:36, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
|
| | * have the application bundle a static implementation and switch
| | to system on at configure time as done for other libs?
|
| At something like five megs of
On Tue, 2007-01-30 at 06:27 +, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
[ Background: tr1 is a set of extensions to the C++ Standard Library
giving various useful things like hash tables and smart pointers. There
are partial implementations included in g++-4.1 and boost and full
implementations available
On 30.01.2007, at 11:40, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
| | * have the application bundle a static implementation and switch
| | to system on at configure time as done for other libs?
|
| At something like five megs of code per application?
|
| If you make that decidable by a USE-flag like
* Hard dep upon boost. This sucks for g++-4.1 users.
* Hard dep upon g++-4.1, which isn't available for all archs. This
doesn't even work because there's no guarantee that =4.1 is being used
even if it's installed.
I don't think these are necessarily compatible. tr1 is implemented in the
Ciaran McCreesh wrote: [Tue Jan 30 2007, 12:27:49AM CST]
* Hard dep upon boost. This sucks for g++-4.1 users.
Agreed. Worse, it's a stop-gap measure, since presumably the long term
solution is for tr1 to be supported directly by the compiler on all
archs. So, any work done with this approach
[ Background: tr1 is a set of extensions to the C++ Standard Library
giving various useful things like hash tables and smart pointers. There
are partial implementations included in g++-4.1 and boost and full
implementations available from Dinkumware. It is likely that a lot of
C++ apps will start
Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
What is the best way to handle packages that require parts of tr1? The
options appear to be:
* have the application bundle a static implementation and switch to
system on at configure time as done for other libs?
lu
--
Luca Barbato
Gentoo/linux Gentoo/PPC
On Tue, 30 Jan 2007 08:30:40 +0100 Luca Barbato [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
| Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
| What is the best way to handle packages that require parts of tr1?
| The options appear to be:
|
|
| * have the application bundle a static implementation and switch to
| system on at configure
Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
On Tue, 30 Jan 2007 08:30:40 +0100 Luca Barbato [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
| Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
| What is the best way to handle packages that require parts of tr1?
| The options appear to be:
|
|
| * have the application bundle a static implementation and
23 matches
Mail list logo