Am 06.11.2013 22:03 schrieb Vicente J. Botet Escriba:

I have not yet analyzed this bug https://svn.boost.org/trac/boost/ticket/9333 and I don't know if it is a bug on Boost.Thread or on Visual Studio 2013/Visual C++ 12.

Changeset 86595 fixes this problem. At least, my regression test runs say so. Ciao Dani

On 11.11.2013 3:10, Daniel James wrote:

On 9 November 2013 19:49, Daniela Engert wrote:

...

Am 06.11.2013 22:03 schrieb Vicente J. Botet Escriba:

...

I have not yet analyzed this bug https://svn.boost.org/trac/boost/ticket/9333 and I don't know if it is a bug on Boost.Thread or on Visual Studio 2013/Visual C++ 12.

Changeset 86595 fixes this problem. At least, my regression test runs say so.

It really would help if someone could test a patch against the release branch and post it if it works. There are a lot of differences between release and trunk and I don't want to be guessing here. JFYI: I was using the 1.55RC2, not the trunk, when debugging #9333. So, I don't expect any problems with applying this changeset to the release branch.

Btw, what do you think about an additional SVN branch for the post-RC2 VC12-related bugfixes? -- Sergey Cheban

On 11 November 2013 12:36, Sergey Cheban wrote:

Btw, what do you think about an additional SVN branch for the post-RC2 VC12-related bugfixes?

I just created a branch at: https://svn.boost.org/svn/boost/branches/maintenance/1_55_0

On 6 November 2013 21:40, JOAQUIN M. LOPEZ MUÑOZ wrote:

Em 06/11/2013, às 19:33, "Daniel James" escreveu:

...

Hello everyone,

I'm compiling a list of known issues in boost with Visual Studio 2013/Visual C++ 12. I've made a quick start at:

http://www.boost.org/users/history/version_1_55_0.html#version_1_55_0.known_...

The issue described as

"For several libraries overloads with intializer lists are incorrectly reported as ambiguous. This is a Visual C++ bug and it isn't clear if there's a good workaround."

looks IMHO more severe than it is: users won't be hit by it if they don't use initializer lists, so the affected libs remain fairly usable. I'd rephrase as "using overloads accepting initializer lists can result in incorrectly diagnosed ambiguity compile-time errors [...]" or something to that effect.

That's a good point. I tried rewriting it to be clearer, but a bullet point isn't really appropriate for explaining such a subtle issue. I think I'll revisit these in a day or two, maybe putting more detailed content in another page (a news item perhaps?).