Re: [boost] [predef] Using predef-check on 'develop' problem

17 Jun 2015


      On 6/16/2015 5:24 PM, Aparna Kumta wrote:
...
On 06/10/15 03:36, Edward Diener wrote:
...
On 6/10/2015 12:36 AM, Rene Rivera wrote:
...
On Tue, Jun 9, 2015 at 10:34 PM, Rene Rivera 
wrote:
...
On Tue, Jun 9, 2015 at 9:56 PM, Jessica Hamilton <
jessica.l.hamilton@gmail.com> wrote:
...
...
On Fri, Jun 5, 2015 at 9:42 PM, Edward Diener

wrote:
> I think I know what is wrong in the predef-check functionality.
> In my
VMD
> jamfile the use of predef-check, for any given compile or run rule,
looks
> like:
>
> [ predef-check "BOOST_COMP_GNUC >= 4.3" "BOOST_OS_QNX == 0" : :
> <cxxflags>-std=c++0x ]
>
Yes..
What I am seeing is that except on QNX, where "BOOST_OS_QNX != 0",
the
> '-std=c++0x' is always being added as a C++ compiler flag to the
command
> line.
>
> This initially suggests to me that you are treating more than one
quoted
> predef definition as an OR gate rather than an AND gate. But note
> that
on
> QNX, where where "BOOST_OS_QNX != 0" and "BOOST_COMP_GNUC >= 4.3" is
On 9 June 2015 at 19:40, Rene Rivera  wrote:
true,
...
> the '-std=c++0x' is not being added. So your logic seems to be
> that as
you
> go through multiple predef definitions once you hit a 'true'
> condition
you
> choose the 'true' path as long as no 'false' conditions follow it,
else you
> choose the 'false' path.
>
> Please see if you can fix this given this clue about how
> predef-check
is
> working for the VMD regression tests on various platforms/compilers.
I don't know if it helped but I did a change to one of the tests I
do to
completely cover all the Venn variations of the binary and
expression. I
changed my test to this:
[ run check_value.cpp : : : <test-info>always_show_run_output
         [ predef-check "BOOST_COMP_CLANG > 0" "BOOST_OS_LINUX ==
0" : :
<cxxflags>-DCHECK_VALUE=true : <cxxflags>-DCHECK_VALUE=false ] ]
Out of curiosity, what happens if you remove the second <cxxflags>
variable, and use an #ifndef check, and run again? It's the only
difference I can notice between the two examples.
OK.. Did that change. My local OSX test shows "CHECK_VALUE == 1" as
expected and correctly. In a few minutes I'll post what the online
tests
show. But the expectation is that they should all show "CHECK_VALUE ==
undefined".
And the online tests are now done. And indeed they all print out
"CHECK_VALUE == undefined".
Feel free to take a look at my VMD tests jamfile. If you see anything
you think is wrong I can change it. I don't think it is the jamfile
but something having to do with the Android and SunOS operating
systems. I realize that I was wrong in thinking that -std=c++0x is
always added, annd that this was my mistake.
The tests for SunOS do not look right.
http://www.boost.org/development/tests/develop/developer/output/oracle-intel...
1)  -Wno-variadic-macros is not a valid option on SunOS.
2) -std=c++0x  and -compat=5  are incompatible
3) -std  and -library=stlport4 are incompatible
Its a predef problem. See the other post I just responded to on this thread.