Re: [Boost-Users] boost::date_time::posix_time and Intel Compiler 7.0?

21 May 2003

      I know I said I will not return soon, but I finally realised that stupid
Visual C++ is to blame for my original compilation error, not anyone from
Boost or the Intel compiler writer team.

For some reason, the order in which you specify include paths (for crying
out loud!) matters in Visual C++!!!

That means I must specify STLPort include path first, then stupid VC98
include path.  Now I am down to one compilation error, using my
much-reported compilation setup :

Compiling...
graph_qt.cpp
C:\PROGRAM FILES\BOOST_1_30_0\boost/lexical_cast.hpp(147): error: no
operator "<<" matches these operands
            operand types are: _STL::basic_stringstream, _STL::allocator> << const
_STL::basic_string
                  return stream << input;
                                ^
          detected during:
            instantiation of "bool={bool}
boost::detail::lexical_stream::operator<<(const Source &)
[with Target=unsigned short, Source=_STL::basic_string]" at line 192
            instantiation of "Target
boost::lexical_cast(Source) [with Target=unsigned short,
Source=_STL::basic_string]" at line 30 of "C:\PROGRAM
FILES\BOOST_1_30_0\boost/date_ti
me/time_parsing.hpp"
            instantiation of "time_duration
boost::date_time::parse_delimited_time_duration(const
_STL::string &) [with time_duration=boost::posix_time::time_duration]"
compilation aborted for C:\home\adutoit\work\s3_qt\s3_qt\graph_qt.cpp (code
2)
Error executing cl.exe.

libs3_qt.lib - 1 error(s), 0 warning(s)

Any ideas? (Except for checking my include path specs again :) )

Greetings,
Andre
----- Original Message -----
From: "adutoit" 
To: 
Sent: Wednesday, May 21, 2003 4:16 PM
Subject: Re: [Boost-Users] boost::date_time::posix_time and Intel Compiler
7.0?
...
Right; here are my compiler options, build configuration and the rest.
Basically I am building a static library, which depends on some in-house
software components, Qt and Boost.
Our own library S3FC (), uses templates in such a manner as to make MSVC6
very unhappy.  Therefore we use the Intel compiler under M$.
Needless to say, our software compiles problemfree with GCC.  For the
aforementioned and other reasons we do not make use of
Microsoft Foundation Classes when compiling under Windoze, but use the
latest version of STLPort (which has been at the same version level for
some
time now).
Anyway; our Windows development work takes place under Visual C++ but with
the Intel compiler (version 7.0) selected instead of the MSVC6 compiler.
OK; with this background then, here is the basic Visual C++ project
settings
for my build of the above-mentioned library.  I have removed include paths
etc. which point to in-house
software:
1) "Not Using MFCC" selected for general project settings (as explained
above).
2) Warning level => 3
    Optimizations => Maximise Speed
     Debug info => None
3)  Project Options =>
    /nologo /ML /W3 /GR /GX /O2 /D "NDEBUG" /D "DEP_MS_WIN" /D "WIN32" /D
"_WINDOWS"
/U "QT_NO_STL" /Fp"Release/libs3_qt.pch" /YX /Fo"Release/" /Fd"Release/"
/FD
/c
The include and library paths for STLPort is set somewhere else, but these
are basically the options.
If anyone knows of any special project options, preprocessor directives I
am
perhaps missing for building Boost-related projects with the Intel
compiler,
please let me know!
I suspect that we will soon be using Boost for other functionality besides
that provided by date_time at the moment.  Besides, I like the library and
works in our main development environment,
Linux with the GCC compiler.
OK, I am forgetting about this problem for a day or two...
Thanks to everyone who has provided me with help so far, especially Jeff
Garland.
Greetings,
Andre.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Jeff Garland" 
To: 
Sent: Wednesday, May 21, 2003 3:42 PM
Subject: RE: [Boost-Users] boost::date_time::posix_time and Intel Compiler
7.0?
...
...
Anyway; it just irks me that I should have issues with 'standard'
stuff,
...
...
like streaming operators.
And the fact that the same code compiles with MSVC6 and NOT the Intel
compiler.
Ok.
...
Back on the #define which started my woes.  The fact of the matter is,
I
get
everything compiled when using MSVC6 and not the Intel compiler!
I.e. the MSVC6-specific code works, the 'other' compiler code for the
supposedly more Boost-compliant/friendly Intel compiler does not.
I guess I was thinking that what was happening is that when compiling
with Intel you were getting the MSVC defined and hence were taking the
non-generic code.  Perhaps not...
Have you tried to run the tests in libs/date_time/test with your
Intel/STLPort configuration?  That might help diagnose the issue.
Also, it might be instructive to post your compile command.  Perhaps
someone with experience on Intel can figure out why your configuration
differs from the one that apparently passes the tests.
...
Could it be because I am using STLPort in conjunction with the Intel
compiler?
Might be a factor.  There have been some issues before with the library
configuration assuming MSVC limitations which don't apply with STLPort
in the mix.
...
Aargh.  Just give me Linux and GCC...
Agreed :-)
Jeff
Info: http://www.boost.org
Wiki: http://www.crystalclearsoftware.com/cgi-bin/boost_wiki/wiki.pl
Unsubscribe: mailto:boost-users-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Info: http://www.boost.org
Wiki: http://www.crystalclearsoftware.com/cgi-bin/boost_wiki/wiki.pl
Unsubscribe: mailto:boost-users-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/