Hi all,
The number 17 comes from the standard (Annex B - Impl. Quantities) and is the minimum recommended limit (and in this case the default limit of the compiler).
It would not be a problem to create a test for this. If a quick fix is required, I don't think it would cause any problems to just add it to the compile options for linux in our Makefile.incl.
-Matt.
| [EMAIL PROTECTED]
12/07/2004 11:36 AM
|
|
> G'day all,
>
> Has anyone seen the following with the latest CVS checkout on linux
> using gcc 2.95.4?
No, we've pretty much given up on 2.95.4. I think Xerces-C is also
problematic on that version as well, so we're probably not losing
anything.
Are there still platforms where something in the 2.95.x series is the
default compiler?
> If you increase -ftemplate-depth-NN it compiles (takes some time but
> works). I don't see this problem on gcc 3.x (although I've only tried
> with a couple of versions.
>
> I think it may need a test in configure, but I think it may be a bit of
> a bugger to write - although we could just try compiling this file I
> suppose :>.
I'm not sure how I would want to do this. We can probably come up with a
test file that instantiate a bunch of our new template classes just to
push things past 17. By the way, I wonder who chose _that_ magic number?
Matt, do you have an opinion?
Thanks!
Dave
