On 11/02/2016 03:32 PM, Levi Morrison wrote:
> Brad, here it is a year later and thought I would get around to
> finishing this work. Then I discovered you had already completed it!
> Thank you so much!
>
> I now have access to the 2017 Intel C++ compiler; is there anything in
> particular you'd
On Wed, Dec 2, 2015 at 8:40 AM, Brad King wrote:
> On 12/02/2015 10:31 AM, Levi Morrison wrote:
>> Hmm. What is the purpose of this module? I verified that indeed my
>> changeset somehow breaks this test but I don't even understand what it
>> is trying to do. At a glance it
On 12/02/2015 10:31 AM, Levi Morrison wrote:
> Hmm. What is the purpose of this module? I verified that indeed my
> changeset somehow breaks this test but I don't even understand what it
> is trying to do. At a glance it looks like even *more* duplication of
> feature detection. Please tell me I'm
On Tue, Dec 1, 2015 at 11:11 AM, Brad King wrote:
> On 12/01/2015 12:47 PM, Levi Morrison wrote:
>> I am having trouble reproducing this failure. When I do an
>> unrestricted ctest (test everything) it will fail, but if I do
>> something like `ctest -VV -R
On 12/01/2015 12:47 PM, Levi Morrison wrote:
> I am having trouble reproducing this failure. When I do an
> unrestricted ctest (test everything) it will fail, but if I do
> something like `ctest -VV -R WriteCompilerDetectionHeader` it will
> pass. Any ideas?
Try ensuring that it is a fresh run of
On Tue, Dec 1, 2015 at 7:11 AM, Brad King wrote:
> On 11/30/2015 02:13 PM, Levi Morrison wrote:
>> Hmm.
>
> Thanks. I applied it yesterday and merged to 'next' for testing:
>
> Features: Record standards and features for Intel C++ on UNIX
>
On 11/30/2015 02:13 PM, Levi Morrison wrote:
> Hmm.
Thanks. I applied it yesterday and merged to 'next' for testing:
Features: Record standards and features for Intel C++ on UNIX
https://cmake.org/gitweb?p=cmake.git;a=commitdiff;h=117d49b8
However, it fails the
On Mon, Nov 30, 2015 at 11:33 AM, Brad King wrote:
> On 11/30/2015 01:18 PM, Levi Morrison wrote:
>> My latest patch is attached. All tests seem to be working for me on
>> the compiler versions I have access to. Can you check it for any
>> glaring errors?
>
> Good. This
On 11/30/2015 01:18 PM, Levi Morrison wrote:
> My latest patch is attached. All tests seem to be working for me on
> the compiler versions I have access to. Can you check it for any
> glaring errors?
Good. This hunk:
> + if (NOT CMAKE_CXX_COMPILER_FORCED)
> +if (NOT
On Thu, Nov 19, 2015 at 8:41 AM, Brad King wrote:
> On 11/18/2015 08:00 PM, Levi Morrison wrote:
> > At a glance this seems to fix the issues in all versions. I will comb
> > through the output again later when I have a fresh mind.
>
> Great!
>
> > +if (NOT
On 11/18/2015 08:00 PM, Levi Morrison wrote:
> At a glance this seems to fix the issues in all versions. I will comb
> through the output again later when I have a fresh mind.
Great!
> +if (NOT CMAKE_CXX_COMPILER_VERSION VERSION_LESS 11.0)
> + set(CMAKE_CXX98_STANDARD_COMPILE_OPTION
On Tue, Nov 17, 2015 at 4:14 PM, Levi Morrison
wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 17, 2015 at 3:09 PM, Levi Morrison
> wrote:
>
>> On Tue, Nov 17, 2015 at 2:38 PM, Brad King wrote:
>>
>>> On 11/17/2015 04:34 PM, Levi Morrison wrote:
On 11/18/2015 11:20 AM, Levi Morrison wrote:
> I have fixed a smattering of issues and was able to get
> Intel versions 14.0.2 , 15.0.2 and 15.0.3 to pass the
> CompilerFeature tests! Hooray!
Great!
> However, I am stuck on Intel 15.0.0.
On 15.0.0 with -std=1y I get __cplusplus==201103L (rather
On 11/18/2015 02:32 PM, Levi Morrison wrote:
> After some other tweaks I am able to get Intel C++ compiler versions
> 12.1.4 13.0.1, 14.0.0, 14.0.2, 15.0.0, 15.0.2, 15.0.3 to work!
> Both tests found by `ctest -R CompileFeatures -VV` pass.
Great. However, the concern I raised earlier about
On Wed, Nov 18, 2015 at 3:34 PM, Levi Morrison
wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 18, 2015 at 1:06 PM, Brad King wrote:
>
>> On 11/18/2015 02:32 PM, Levi Morrison wrote:
>> > After some other tweaks I am able to get Intel C++ compiler versions
>> > 12.1.4
On Wed, Nov 18, 2015 at 1:06 PM, Brad King wrote:
> On 11/18/2015 02:32 PM, Levi Morrison wrote:
> > After some other tweaks I am able to get Intel C++ compiler versions
> > 12.1.4 13.0.1, 14.0.0, 14.0.2, 15.0.0, 15.0.2, 15.0.3 to work!
> > Both tests found by `ctest -R
On 11/16/2015 03:14 PM, Levi Morrison wrote:
> It seems my attachments are getting scrubbed or something?
It was just that one message that was missing one. This one worked.
>> How did you test these? For full testing we need the CMake test
>> suite to pass with the Intel compilers. In
On Tue, Nov 17, 2015 at 6:50 AM, Brad King wrote:
> On 11/16/2015 03:14 PM, Levi Morrison wrote:
> > It seems my attachments are getting scrubbed or something?
>
> It was just that one message that was missing one. This one worked.
>
> >> How did you test these? For full
On Tue, Nov 17, 2015 at 11:13 AM, Levi Morrison
wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 17, 2015 at 6:50 AM, Brad King wrote:
>
>> On 11/16/2015 03:14 PM, Levi Morrison wrote:
>> > It seems my attachments are getting scrubbed or something?
>>
>> It was just that one
On 11/17/2015 03:23 PM, Levi Morrison wrote:
> Attached is the patch.
Thanks. In the CompileFeatures test output one can see
Detecting CXX compile features - failed
Then in Tests/CompileFeatures/CMakeFiles/CMakeError.log one can see
the error:
>
> Also after fixing the above I see in
> Tests/CompileFeatures/CMakeFiles/CMakeOutput.log the following:
>
> Detecting CXX [-std=c++14] compiler features compiled with the
> following output:
> ...
> icpc: command line warning #10159: invalid argument for option '-std'
>
> This is
On 11/17/2015 03:57 PM, Levi Morrison wrote:
> Also, it is worth pointing out that some of the features are partially
> supported in earlier versions, but in the FeatureTests.cmake I put it
> only for the first version that claims complete compatibility
> - is that the correct action?
Yes,
On Tue, Nov 17, 2015 at 1:23 PM, Levi Morrison
wrote:
> > I'm not sure how to edit Tests/CompileFeatures/CMakeLists.txt, though.
>> > I don't even know what half of this file is trying to accomplish.
>> > It seems like it is pure duplication of work; these checks are
On 11/17/2015 01:13 PM, Levi Morrison wrote:
> I have updated Modules/Compiler/Intel-CXX-FeatureTests.cmake.
Great.
> I'm not sure how to edit Tests/CompileFeatures/CMakeLists.txt, though.
> I don't even know what half of this file is trying to accomplish.
> It seems like it is pure duplication
>
> > I'm not sure how to edit Tests/CompileFeatures/CMakeLists.txt, though.
> > I don't even know what half of this file is trying to accomplish.
> > It seems like it is pure duplication of work; these checks are saying
> > EXPECT_C_STATIC_ASSERT=1 if some compiler conditions are true but
> > I
On 11/17/2015 04:34 PM, Levi Morrison wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 17, 2015 at 2:07 PM, Levi Morrison wrote:
>>> icpc: command line warning #10159: invalid argument for option '-std'
>> Hmm. Can you tell me what the value of -std was for that invocation?
>
> Hazarding a guess I think it might be gnu++14
On Tue, Nov 17, 2015 at 2:38 PM, Brad King wrote:
> On 11/17/2015 04:34 PM, Levi Morrison wrote:
> > On Tue, Nov 17, 2015 at 2:07 PM, Levi Morrison wrote:
> >>> icpc: command line warning #10159: invalid argument for option '-std'
> >> Hmm. Can you tell me what the value
On Tue, Nov 17, 2015 at 2:07 PM, Levi Morrison
wrote:
> Also after fixing the above I see in
>> Tests/CompileFeatures/CMakeFiles/CMakeOutput.log the following:
>>
>> Detecting CXX [-std=c++14] compiler features compiled with the
>> following output:
>> ...
>>
On Mon, Nov 16, 2015 at 9:42 AM, Brad King wrote:
> HI Levi,
>
> Thanks for coming forward to work on this!
>
> On 11/16/2015 11:34 AM, Levi Morrison wrote:
> > Why is MSVC doing a version check around the CXX_STANDARD_DEFAULT?
>
> The version check delimits the set of
On 11/16/2015 11:46 AM, Levi Morrison wrote:
> should I bound this by versions that exist? For instance, there is no
> Intel 17.0 so should I limit this?
No. For other compilers we just assume newer versions are at least
as capable as previous versions and are compatible with the needed
options
>
> Note that the Intel compiler may be tricky because it simulates MSVC
> on Windows and GNU elsewhere. The needed options may vary across
> platforms, and our tables need to reflect this.
See the attached patch; will the if UNIX check will suffice for now?
Message was rejected – retrying.
On Mon, Nov 16, 2015 at 9:31 AM, Levi Morrison
wrote:
> First off, this is my first attempt at a CMake contribution ever, so
> please be gentle!
>
> I have a few questions about my patch, though:
>
> Why is MSVC doing a version check
HI Levi,
Thanks for coming forward to work on this!
On 11/16/2015 11:34 AM, Levi Morrison wrote:
> Why is MSVC doing a version check around the CXX_STANDARD_DEFAULT?
The version check delimits the set of versions for which CMake
has recorded knowledge of C++ feature availability.
> Should I be
On 11/16/2015 12:21 PM, Levi Morrison wrote:
> I found and fixed a mistake in my macro.
Great. Did you mean to attach the corrected version?
> I have now tested this on Intel 12, 13, 14, and 15 for both C++11 and C++14.
How did you test these? For full testing we need the CMake test
suite to
On Mon, Nov 16, 2015 at 9:54 AM, Levi Morrison
wrote:
> Note that the Intel compiler may be tricky because it simulates MSVC
>> on Windows and GNU elsewhere. The needed options may vary across
>> platforms, and our tables need to reflect this.
>
>
> See the attached
>
> How did you test these? For full testing we need the CMake test
>> suite to pass with the Intel compilers. In particular, tests with
>> 'CompileFeatures' in their name cover this functionality.
>
>
> I was able to build and use (or not use as appropriately) C++11 and C++14
> for a given
On Mon, Nov 16, 2015 at 11:31 AM, Brad King wrote:
> On 11/16/2015 12:21 PM, Levi Morrison wrote:
> > I found and fixed a mistake in my macro.
>
> Great. Did you mean to attach the corrected version?
>
It seems my attachments are getting scrubbed or something?
> I have
37 matches
Mail list logo