Re: [Opencxx-users] compiling on linux.

[harsh g. <mer...@li...>]

> From: pj...@in...
> To: mer...@li...
> CC: ope...@li...
> Subject: Re: [Opencxx-users] compiling on linux.
> Date: Sat, 21 May 2011 13:16:28 +0200
> 
> harsh gupta <mer...@li...> writes:
> 
> > I needed to use the openc++ parser for an application that i was developing. The platform for use is Ubuntu Linux 10.04. Basically what i need is a c++ parser and openc++ seemed to be a worthy candidate.
> >
> > however on running the wrapper example i get the following error,
> >
> > /usr/include/wchar.h:220: parse error before `"wcschr"'
> > /usr/include/stdlib.h:525: parse error before `"at_quick_exit"'
> > /usr/include/c++/4.4/bits/cpp_type_traits.h:99: parse error before `>'
> > /usr/include/c++/4.4/bits/cpp_type_traits.h:104: parse error before `template'
> > /usr/include/c++/4.4/ext/type_traits.h:37: parse error before `__gnu_cxx'
> > /usr/include/c++/4.4/ext/type_traits.h:174: parse error before `+'
> > /usr/include/c++/4.4/ext/type_traits.h:186: parse error before `+'
> > /usr/include/c++/4.4/ext/type_traits.h:199: parse error before `+'
> > /usr/include/c++/4.4/ext/numeric_traits.h:37: parse error before `__gnu_cxx'
> > /usr/include/c++/4.4/ext/numeric_traits.h:63: parse error before `template'
> > occ: too many errors
> >
> > Please suggest what i can do to correct this error. Alternatively if
> > you could suggest some other way of developing a wrapper for openc++,
> > where i could get the parse tree of a cpp file programmatically then
> > it would be a great help.
> >
> > I tried printing out the parse tree using the -s arguement and by
> > supressing preprocessing then it works fine (on the terminal).
> 
> AFAIK, you may either use an older compiler.  I'd guess gcc 3.3 would work.
> 
> Or you may update the openc++ parser so it can parse the new C++
> implemented by gcc 4.4.
> 
> -- 

i downloaded the latest release from the opencxx downloads page. How do i get the updated code for the gcc 4.4 implementation

Harsh Gupta



> __Pascal Bourguignon__                     http://www.informatimago.com/
> A bad day in () is better than a good day in {}.