David Crayford ha escrito:
Thanks Joaquin, actually the z/OS release is 6. I t= ried changing __IBMCPP__ to 600 but it screwed the compile.
OK. Well, the following is a slightly more convoluted way to check whether your compiler is able to cope with Boost, more or less: 1. Globally search "__IBMCPP__" in the codebase (about 100 occurrences) and replace it with, say, BOOST_IBMCPP. This task should be simple if you're a Unix man. 2. Compile your test code with a compiler switch defining the macro BOOST_IBMCPP to 600. I think in your case the compiler switch is -DBOOST_IBMCPP=600 3. Shake and serve. Please report your results back. Thank you!
I'm new to this list, how do I contact J= ohn Maddock?
He's a regular on this list. If you post a message with a more focused subject line surely he'll delve in.
BTW, I'm sorry if my mails are mang= led, it seems to be a problem with the lotus notes browser client.
You can use web-based gmane service for posting to the list: http://news.gmane.org/gmane.comp.lib.boost.devel Good luck, Joaquín M López Muñoz Telefónica, Investigación y Desarrollo
1. Globally search "__IBMCPP__" in the codebase (about 100 occurrences) and replace it with, say, BOOST_IBMCPP. This task should be simple if you're a Unix man.
Nitto, I'm an MVS man, but SlickEdit is my friend...although we do have UNIX systems services running as a task, so I suppose GREP is the go.
2. Compile your test code with a compiler switch defining the macro BOOST_IBMCPP to 600. I think in your case the compiler switch is -DBOOST_IBMCPP=600 3. Shake and serve.
I'm crossing my fingers. It's define(DBOOST_IBMCPP=600) on MVS.
Please report your results back. Thank you!
Will do...
I'm new to this list, how do I contact J= ohn Maddock?
He's a regular on this list. If you post a message with a more focused subject line surely he'll delve in.
What a good bunch you are, gracias amigo mío
2. Compile your test code with a compiler switch defining the macro BOOST_IBMCPP to 600. I think in your case the compiler switch is -DBOOST_IBMCPP=600 3. Shake and serve.
Bah! It didn't fix my problem, getting the following errors (same as before): "/FTS1/tmp/doc/boost/mpl/aux_/integral_wrapper.hpp", line 85.30: CCN5431 (S) The declarator cannot be qualified with the enclosing namespace "mpl_". "/FTS1/tmp/doc/boost/mpl/aux_/integral_wrapper.hpp", line 85.30: CCN5431 (S) The declarator cannot be qualified with the enclosing namespace "mpl_". If I change BOOST_IBMCPP to < 600 I get the following errors: "/FTS1/tmp/doc/boost/multi_index/detail/node_type.hpp", line 56.39: CCN5063 (S) The text "<" is unexpected. "/FTS1/tmp/doc/boost/multi_index/detail/base_type.hpp", line 54.40: CCN5063 (S) The text "<" is unexpected.
David Crayford ha escrito:
2. Compile your test code with a compiler switch defining the macro BOOST_IBMCPP to 600. I think in your case the compiler switch is -DBOOST_IBMCPP=600 3. Shake and serve.
Bah! It didn't fix my problem, getting the following errors (same as before):
"/FTS1/tmp/doc/boost/mpl/aux_/integral_wrapper.hpp", line 85.30: CCN5431 (S) The declarator cannot be qualified with the enclosing namespace "mpl_".
"/FTS1/tmp/doc/boost/mpl/aux_/integral_wrapper.hpp", line 85.30: CCN5431 (S) The declarator cannot be qualified with the enclosing namespace "mpl_".
If I change BOOST_IBMCPP to < 600 I get the following errors:
"/FTS1/tmp/doc/boost/multi_index/detail/node_type.hpp", line 56.39: CCN5063 (S) The text "<" is unexpected. "/FTS1/tmp/doc/boost/multi_index/detail/base_type.hpp", line 54.40: CCN5063 (S) The text "<" is unexpected.
_______________________________________________ Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost
David, I'm afraid I don't have a clue... The local changes you've done seem to be having effect, since the behavior is different for different values of BOOST_IBMCPP, so I think we can rule out some missing detail in the test process. Just to make sure, can you add an explicit #error preprocessor directive at line 69 of boost/mpl/aux_/integral_wrapper.hpp? If the error pops up on compilation then the local patch is working as expected (i.e. the correct workaround in that file is being used.) Sorry I cannot provide more helpful suggestions. Joaquín M López Muñoz Telefónica, Investigación y Desarrollo
What version of the compiler are you using. It appears that you are using the v1r2 compiler. I suggest trying the v1r6 compiler. -- Sean Perry Compiler Development, W-Code Architect IBM Canada Lab (905)-413-6031 (tie 969-6031), fax (905)-413-4839 David Crayford <david_crayford@f undi.com.au> To Sent by: boost@lists.boost.org boost-bounces@lis cc ts.boost.org Subject [boost] [vacpp] Problems porting to 09/22/2005 11:18 z/OS - was Errors compiling AM multi_index hashed.cpp Please respond to boost
2. Compile your test code with a compiler switch defining the macro BOOST_IBMCPP to 600. I think in your case the compiler switch is -DBOOST_IBMCPP=600 3. Shake and serve.
Bah! It didn't fix my problem, getting the following errors (same as before): "/FTS1/tmp/doc/boost/mpl/aux_/integral_wrapper.hpp", line 85.30: CCN5431 (S) The declarator cannot be qualified with the enclosing namespace "mpl_". "/FTS1/tmp/doc/boost/mpl/aux_/integral_wrapper.hpp", line 85.30: CCN5431 (S) The declarator cannot be qualified with the enclosing namespace "mpl_". If I change BOOST_IBMCPP to < 600 I get the following errors: "/FTS1/tmp/doc/boost/multi_index/detail/node_type.hpp", line 56.39: CCN5063 (S) The text "<" is unexpected. "/FTS1/tmp/doc/boost/multi_index/detail/base_type.hpp", line 54.40: CCN5063 (S) The text "<" is unexpected. _______________________________________________ Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost
Sean Perry <perry <at> ca.ibm.com> writes:
What version of the compiler are you using. It appears that you are using the v1r2 compiler. I suggest trying the v1r6 compiler.
Sean, I'm using the V1R6 compiler, unless the build is bad. I've copied the boost libraries into HFS files in USS and compiling on z/OS using a path option. If you guys in Toronto can help in any way it will be a very big help.
participants (3)
-
David Crayford -
Joaquín Mª López Muñoz -
Sean Perry