On Mon, 24 Feb 2014 19:33:30 +0100
Anders Logg <[email protected]> wrote:

> On Mon, Feb 24, 2014 at 06:27:29PM +0100, Jan Blechta wrote:
> > On Mon, 24 Feb 2014 16:52:18 +0100
> > Nico Schlömer <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> > > > Shouldn't -std=c++11 be switched for -std=c++0x which is only
> > > > recognized by GCC 4.6 in Ubuntu Precise, the latest long-term
> > > > release?
> > >
> > > Just bumped into this as well.
> >
> > This is already handled in DOLFIN (by CMake), so it is desirable to
> > be handled also in UFC. Is it possible, Anders? Relevant code is
> > line 10
> >
> >   CXX_FLAGS = "-std=c++11 " + os.environ.get("CXXFLAGS", "")
> >
> > in ffc/setup.py
> 
> Sure this can be added, but I don't know how to check for which flags
> are suppported. Is there a standard way to check for supported
> compiler flags in distutils?

It does not seem that there is a systematic way of doing this. What
about try/except sequence for flags in [' -std=c++11 ', ' -std=c++0x ',
' ']. The latter should work with compilers which support C++0x/11 by
default without flags. On fail, we could print out "Your compiler does
not seem to support C++0x/11. Otherwise, set environment variable
CXX_FLAGS appropriately."

In the case that this would need speed-up, try/except loop could be
performed with dummy file to detect respective flag.

Jan

> 
> --
> Anders
> 
> 
> > Jan
> >
> > > --Nico
> > >
> > >
> > > On Fri, Feb 21, 2014 at 3:44 PM, Jan Blechta
> > > <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > > Shouldn't -std=c++11 be switched for -std=c++0x which is only
> > > > recognized by GCC 4.6 in Ubuntu Precise, the latest long-term
> > > > release?
> > > >
> > > > Jan
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On Fri, 21 Feb 2014 15:11:05 +0100
> > > > Johannes Ring <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > >
> > > >> On Fri, Feb 21, 2014 at 3:05 PM, Anders Logg <[email protected]>
> > > >> wrote:
> > > >> > On Fri, Feb 21, 2014 at 03:00:01PM +0100, Johannes Ring
> > > >> > wrote:
> > > >> >> On Fri, Feb 21, 2014 at 2:15 PM, Anders Logg
> > > >> >> <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > >> >> > UFC has now been merged into FFC. Some work remains to do
> > > >> >> > some cleanup after the merge (mostly merging of the
> > > >> >> > documentation), but everything should work now. This
> > > >> >> > means that FEniCS users no longer need to download and
> > > >> >> > install UFC separately.
> > > >> >> >
> > > >> >> > Some issues:
> > > >> >> >
> > > >> >> > - Can we mark the UFC repository as discontinued on
> > > >> >> > Bitbucket? Should it be removed?
> > > >> >> >
> > > >> >> > - How do we handle installation in Dorsal? If we just
> > > >> >> > remove the UFC package, then it will work for
> > > >> >> > installation from the master branch but will fail for
> > > >> >> > download of the latest stable version.
> > > >> >>
> > > >> >> We can fix this temporarily by setting BUILDCHAIN=cmake in
> > > >> >> ufc-stable.package and BUILDCHAIN=nothing in ufc.package.
> > > >> >> This will checkout UFC from git but nothing will be built or
> > > >> >> installed when STABLE_BUILD=false. When 1.4 is release, we
> > > >> >> can remove the UFC package.
> > > >> >
> > > >> > Sounds good. Will you fix?
> > > >>
> > > >> Yes, done.
> > > >>
> > > >> Johannes
> > > >> _______________________________________________
> > > >> fenics mailing list
> > > >> [email protected]
> > > >> http://fenicsproject.org/mailman/listinfo/fenics
> > > >
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > fenics mailing list
> > > > [email protected]
> > > > http://fenicsproject.org/mailman/listinfo/fenics
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > fenics mailing list
> > > [email protected]
> > > http://fenicsproject.org/mailman/listinfo/fenics
> >
> _______________________________________________
> fenics mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://fenicsproject.org/mailman/listinfo/fenics

_______________________________________________
fenics mailing list
[email protected]
http://fenicsproject.org/mailman/listinfo/fenics

Reply via email to