incubator-stdcxx-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Martin Sebor <se...@roguewave.com>
Subject Re: NEW_OFLOW_SAFE config test
Date Tue, 25 Mar 2008 14:41:30 GMT
Farid Zaripov wrote:
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Martin Sebor [mailto:msebor@gmail.com] On Behalf Of Martin Sebor
>> Sent: Tuesday, March 25, 2008 3:46 AM
>> To: dev@stdcxx.apache.org
>> Subject: Re: NEW_OFLOW_SAFE config test
>>
>> Eric Lemings wrote:
>>>  
>>> Here's an error compiling the NEW_OFLOW_SAFE.cpp config test:
>>>
>>> aCC -mt -I. -AA   +w +W392 +W655 +W684 +W818 +W819 +W849 
>> +W2193 +W2236
>>> +W2261 +W2340 +W240
>>> 1 +W2487 +W4227 +W4229 +W4231 +W4235 +W4237 +W4249 +W4255 +W4272 
>>> +W4284
>>> +W4285 +W4286 +W42
>>> 96 +W4297 +W3348  -c
>>>
>> /amd/devco/lemings/work/stdcxx/trunk.gofish/etc/config/src/NEW_OFLOW_
>>> SAFE.cpp -o NEW_OFLOW_SAFE.o
>>>
>> "/amd/devco/lemings/work/stdcxx/trunk.gofish/etc/config/src/NEW_OFLOW_
>>> SA
>>> FE.cpp", line 46:
>>> error #2020: identifier "size_t" is undefined
>>>           void* p = ::operator new (size_t (-1));
>>>                                     ^
>>>  
>>> Shouldn't 'size_t' be replaced with '_RWSTD_SIZE_T'?  Or one of the 
>>> standard headers should be included (e.g. <stddef.h>, <cstddef>)?
>> The latter. This regression was introduced here:
>>    http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=rev&revision=634731
> 
>   Hmm. The NEW_THROWS.cpp before this change also used size_t without
> including the stddef.h:
> http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/stdcxx/trunk/etc/config/src/NEW_THROWS.cpp?
> revision=611451&view=markup&pathrev=634731

But it included stdio.h, didn't it? And stdio defines size_t.
No big deal though. we caught it early enough that we can fix
it without it having caused any major problems.

Martin

Mime
View raw message