On Thu, 21 Jan 2010 17:03:27 +0100, Michael Wild <[email protected]> wrote: > But both of them just do a try_compile. I don't see where the > name-mangling comes in there... If the user wants to check for a > template, he has to instantiate the template, > e.g. check_cxx_function_exists("std::copy<std::string::const_iterator, > std::string::iterator>" "algorithm;string" HAVE_STD_COPY). Tedious, > but should work. To check for classes, you'd need a different macro, > however.
You're kidding, right? Have you looked at CheckFunctionExists.c? It declares the symbol as char SYMBOL_NAME(); and then tries to link a program that calls this function. No headers are included, so there is no way for this symbol to match the mangled symbol in the library. Of course, you could write a completely different thing with an interface more like check_cxx_source_compiles, and call this new thing check_cxx_function_exists, but that would be terribly inconsistent so I hope you don't. Jed _______________________________________________ Powered by www.kitware.com Visit other Kitware open-source projects at http://www.kitware.com/opensource/opensource.html Please keep messages on-topic and check the CMake FAQ at: http://www.cmake.org/Wiki/CMake_FAQ Follow this link to subscribe/unsubscribe: http://www.cmake.org/mailman/listinfo/cmake
