On 7/2/2018 12:10 PM, degski via Boost wrote:
On 2 July 2018 at 19:54, Robert via Boost
wrote: Some of the team have updated to 15.7.4. Because of my using the older Microsoft version ...
You can install the preview side-by-side with the stable version, you'd have BOBW (another advice from STL).
Yeah, I am not too excited about that on my primary desktop. I might install the preview on a VM though. Presently, the team continues to find newly released "features" that break stuff. Hence, my now four decades (and growing) distrust...
This may not be known to news group members here. But, the Windows Intel
C++ compiler is heavily dependent on the Microsoft supplied standard library header files (e.g. from 2015: https://software.intel.com/en- us/forums/intel-c-compiler/topic/596318).
You said it, it's a compiler, not an implementation of a STL.
Similarly, in a Mac oriented post, there is a dependency on the gcc header files (e.g. from 2013: https://software.intel.com/en- us/forums/intel-c-compiler/topic/366102).
Luckily I know nothing about Mac (in the same category as fuckbook.com, twitter (I don't own a phone) and smartphones in general (fat fingers, but my wife keeps asking me to debug her bloody Android phone, shit)).
I have already submitted an issue with Intel that the Visual Studio 15.7.4 headers cause Intel 18.0, Update 3 to produce thousands of spurious errors on the std::variant.
Yeah, I know from experience that they are very slow in reacting (if they react at all, which is usually not the case). F.e. the way they detect the compiler in tbb/mkl does not work with Clang/LLVM on windows, because they do the detection (if it should work) in the wrong order (they should check for VC first and Clang later, can't go wrong on linux/Mac), seems pretty simple, I filed it, but it is still as it used to be.
I have them fixing a couple other items too. As far as speedily resolving something, that all depends on what the Intel group determines is important. Tea leaf interpretation or flipping a coin 50 times, is about the same prediction accuracy. :) --Robert
degski