Paul Mensonides wrote
On Tue, 03 Apr 2012 19:27:40 -0700, lcaminiti wrote:
Is (BOOST_PP_VALUE) / 1000000000UL not a valid constant expression on Sun 64-bits machines?
32 vs. 64-bit shouldn't make a difference to the mechanism. I suppose it might matter if something was less than 32-bit.
I can't reproduce this error on my Sun C++ compiler installed on 32-bit Ubuntu Linux... so maybe this is about the actual Sun machine and not the Sun compiler... However, all Boost.Preprocessor tests pass on Sun... http://www.boost.org/development/tests/trunk/developer/preprocessor.html
Any suggestion?
Thanks a lot. --Lorenzo
I have no idea what the problem is (and I don't have access to the compiler/architecture to figure it out). What's BOOST_PP_VALUE defined as?
It's a bit different for me to be sure about what was going on but I think the following caused the error: # define BOOST_PP_ITERATION_PARAMS_1 \ (3, (0, BOOS_PP_SUB(BOOST_FUNCTIONAL_OVERLOADED_FUNCTION_CONFIG_OVERLOAD_MAX, 2), \ "boost/functional/overloaded_function.hpp")) # include BOOST_PP_ITERATE() // Iterate over function arity. The issue goes away if I remove the PP_SUB from within the PARAMS_1 definition (that's how I worked around the issue, I iterate 2 to MAX and then SUB 2 from within the iteration frame). Is that expected or it's a bug in the Sun pp macro expansion? This issue only happened on Sun... Thanks a lot. --Lorenzo -- View this message in context: http://boost.2283326.n4.nabble.com/boost-preprocessor-badly-formed-constant-... Sent from the Boost - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.