Am Freitag, 29. Mai 2015 um 21:59:16, schrieb pdv
> On 29/05/15 20:10, Kornel Benko wrote:
> > Am Freitag, 29. Mai 2015 um 19:52:03, schrieb Jean-Marc Lasgouttes
> >
> >> Le 28/05/2015 23:23, pdv a écrit :
> >>> Starting with commit b596330 lyx fails to compile with cmake/xcode.
> >>> This seems
Am Freitag, 29. Mai 2015 um 19:52:03, schrieb Jean-Marc Lasgouttes
> Le 28/05/2015 23:23, pdv a écrit :
> > Starting with commit b596330 lyx fails to compile with cmake/xcode.
> > This seems to be due to "boost::next" having been replaced by "next" and
> > this generates "ambiguous call to 'next'
Le 28/05/2015 23:23, pdv a écrit :
Starting with commit b596330 lyx fails to compile with cmake/xcode.
This seems to be due to "boost::next" having been replaced by "next" and
this generates "ambiguous call to 'next'" semantic issues, one of the 2
possibilities being the "next" in lyxalgo.h menti
Am Donnerstag, 28. Mai 2015 um 23:23:07, schrieb pdv
> On 19/05/15 11:25, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
> > Hi Georg,
> >
> > It is not possible currently to compile with gcc 4.6 in C++11 mode
> > because lyxalgo.h declares its own next() method. This is because the
> > code depends on __cplusplus >
On 19/05/15 11:25, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
Hi Georg,
It is not possible currently to compile with gcc 4.6 in C++11 mode
because lyxalgo.h declares its own next() method. This is because the
code depends on __cplusplus >= 201103L, which is not true for this
version of the compiler.
I would p
Le 22/05/2015 08:58, Georg Baum a écrit :
This is a misunderstanding: 199711L is the value for C++98 and C++03,
therefore
__cplusplus > 199711L
tests for the a standard later than C++03, and the next one happens to be
C++11. Therefore, this test is in practice the same test as the ones you
hand
Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
> Le 19/05/2015 20:34, Georg Baum a écrit :
>>
>> Maybe some of them, but at least the one in tex2lyx should be converted
>> to LYX_USE_CXX11.
>
> For me it tests against C++98, and I think this is a given these days.
> But since I do not understand the subtleties of s
Le 19/05/2015 20:34, Georg Baum a écrit :
Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
Georg, would the following commit suit you? With it, I am able to
compile with gcc 4.6 in C++11 mode.
I would prefer testing for __cplusplus, since it is defined by the C++
standard. However, since this does not work I do n
Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
> Georg, would the following commit suit you? With it, I am able to
> compile with gcc 4.6 in C++11 mode.
I would prefer testing for __cplusplus, since it is defined by the C++
standard. However, since this does not work I do not know of a better way
than you propose
Le 19/05/2015 11:45, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes a écrit :
Le 19/05/2015 11:25, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes a écrit :
Hi Georg,
It is not possible currently to compile with gcc 4.6 in C++11 mode
because lyxalgo.h declares its own next() method. This is because the
code depends on __cplusplus >= 201103L, whic
Le 19/05/2015 11:25, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes a écrit :
Hi Georg,
It is not possible currently to compile with gcc 4.6 in C++11 mode
because lyxalgo.h declares its own next() method. This is because the
code depends on __cplusplus >= 201103L, which is not true for this
version of the compiler.
Mor
Hi Georg,
It is not possible currently to compile with gcc 4.6 in C++11 mode
because lyxalgo.h declares its own next() method. This is because the
code depends on __cplusplus >= 201103L, which is not true for this
version of the compiler.
I would propose to replace this test with a test on w
12 matches
Mail list logo