"John Maddock" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >>Currently, BOOST_NO_EXPLICIT_FUNCTION_TEMPLATE_ARGUMENTS >>is not defined for gcc. However, the following URL in the gcc bug >>database >> >>http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=7676 >> >>leads me to believe that the macro should be set on for the appropriate >>versions of gcc. Matter of fact, I run with this problem myself and it >>can be >>workedaround with techniques similar to those employed for MSVC. See >>for instance definitions of get() and workaround_holder in >> >>boost/tuple/detail/tuple_basic_no_partial_spec.hpp >> > > Thanks, > > The issue with gcc seems to be a little more specific than we normally set > the macro for, but I don't see any reason why we shouldn't set it. Am I > right in thinking that this is specific to gcc 3.1 and 3.2? Also do you > have a test case that can be added to the appropriate config test?
We need a more-specific macro. The problem is that when the function *doesn't* have type and non-type parameter overloads, the workaround breaks those very same versions of GCC. See http://boost.sourceforge.net/regression-logs/cs-Linux/developer_result_page.html#crc. (http://tinyurl.com/k5or) -- Dave Abrahams Boost Consulting www.boost-consulting.com _______________________________________________ Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost
