--- David Abrahams <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > "Ralf W. Grosse-Kunstleve" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > There are gcc 2.96 (Redhat 7.3) compilation error for > > boost/libs/python/test/opaque.cpp: > > > > http://cci.lbl.gov/~rwgk/tmp/rc_1_30_0_opaque_fail.txt > > > > More recent gcc's don't seems to suffer from this problem. > > I am not sure this is important enough to delay the release any further. > > David? > > > > Ralf > > Hmm, looking at: > > # define BOOST_PYTHON_OPAQUE_SPECIALIZED_TYPE_ID(Pointee) \ > namespace boost { namespace python { \ > template<> \ > inline type_info type_id(boost::type<Pointee>*) { \ > return type_info (typeid (Pointee *)); \ > } \ > template<> \ > inline type_info type_id( \ > boost::type<const volatile Pointee &>*) { \ > return type_info (typeid (Pointee *)); \ > } \ > }} > > it seems to me that these aren't actually legal specializations > (though I've never specialized functions before so I could be wrong). > Shouldn't that be: > > template <> > inline type_info type_id<Pointee>(boost::type<Pointee>*) { > return type_info(typeid(Pointee*)); > } > > template <> > inline type_info type_id<const volatile Pointee&>( > boost::type<const volatile Pointee&>*) { > return type_info(typeid(Pointee*)); > } > > ??
That change does not seem to make a difference. The compiler errors are still exactly the same. Ralf __________________________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Platinum - Watch CBS' NCAA March Madness, live on your desktop! http://platinum.yahoo.com _______________________________________________ Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost
