Hi Frank,
On Wednesday, 2009-08-26 20:59:40 +0200, Frank Schönheit wrote:
I'll leave the task of building boost and linking against it for you,
for a follow-up CWS :)
/me hoped for it magically appearing, ready to use ;-)
Eike
--
OOo/SO Calc core developer. Number formatter stricken
Hi,
overlooked this ...
On Wednesday, 2009-08-19 10:20:18 +0200, Rene Engelhard wrote:
On Wed, Aug 19, 2009 at 08:56:23AM +0200, Regina Henschel wrote:
The new Math libraries 'Special Functions' and 'Statistical
Distribution' are not included in Boost 1.34, but first in Boost 1.35.
Hi Eike,
However, having the boost math lib would be of great benefit for Calc,
so I strongly vote for possibly the latest version of boost that's
available, but at least 1.35
I didn't hear any strong objections against using 1.39 (or 1.38 at least
for system-boost), so I think I'll go for
Hi Frank,
Frank Schoenheit - Sun Germany - ham02 - Hamburg schrieb:
Hi Rene,
[..]
[ Seems so, do you now strictly need 1.39?
No, I think 1.34 would do, too. As said, a previous incarnation of the
CWS compiles fine with 1.34, but again, I didn't do extensive runtime
checks with this
Hi,
On Wed, Aug 19, 2009 at 08:56:23AM +0200, Regina Henschel wrote:
The new Math libraries 'Special Functions' and 'Statistical
Distribution' are not included in Boost 1.34, but first in Boost 1.35.
The accuracy of those functions is ongoing work in Calc and doing it
ourself has been a
On Tue, 2009-08-18 at 22:56 +0200, Frank Schönheit - Sun Microsystems
Germany wrote:
If boost 1.39 proves to be too problematic,
We've been building with 1.39 for some time without any noticeable
problems except for one little buglet in the function_template header
where a #if
Hi Caolán,
We've been building with 1.39 for some time without any noticeable
problems
good to know, thanks.
except for one little buglet in the function_template header
where a #if !defined(BOOST_NO_EXCEPTIONS) is in the wrong place.
Yeah, stumbled upon this, too.
Thanks Ciao
Frank
--
