Thread: [Opencxx-users] Gcc 4.0

SourceForge Headquarters 225 Broadway Suite 1600 San Diego, CA 92101 +1 (858) 422-6466

Hi everyone,

How should I procced to use openc++ with gcc 4.0?

-- 
Emilio Wuerges
LAPS - Laboratorio de Automacao de Projeto de Sistemas
UFSC - Universidade Federal de Santa Catarina
Brasil

Emílio Wuerges wrote:
> Hi everyone,
> 
> How should I procced to use openc++ with gcc 4.0?

Can you elaborate what you mean with 'use with gcc 4.0' ?

Are you looking for ways to compile openc++ with gcc 4.0 ?

Or Use openc++ with gcc 4.0 system headers (i.e. when
processing your own code with it) ?

Openc++ should probably compile fine with any version of gcc,
but I believe the libstdc++ version that ships with gcc 4.0
contains constructs that openc++'s parser can't handle
(that's what I alluded to in my previous mail).

Regards,
		Stefan

-- 

      ...ich hab' noch einen Koffer in Berlin...

Hi Emilio,
I've been unable to use OpenC++ with gcc 4.x. OpenC++'s parser barfs
on some of the standard headers. I do have it working with gcc 3.x.
Although, I have hacked the parser a bit to get it to work, and the
latest OpenC++ cvs snapshot may not have similar patches applied to
it.

You may want to install multiple versions of gcc on your system,
having the latest/greatest as your default and using an older version
with OpenC++. On Debian-based systems (e.g. Ubuntu), they offer
different gcc version packages. For the older versions, the commands
are appended with "-version"; for example, "gcc" becomes "gcc-3.3".
When you build OpenC++ by hand, you can pass configure options that
tell it to use the older version of gcc. There is a catch, though.
OpenC++ hard codes the name of the compiler "g++" into its source as a
string. Before you compile OpenC++, you will need to find that string
and replace it with the correct command name for your version. I can't
recall if there are any other difficulties with getting this sort of
setup to work, but there may very well be.

Good luck!
Cheers, Scott

On 11/16/06, Em=EDlio Wuerges <wu...@gm...> wrote:
> Hi everyone,
>
> How should I procced to use openc++ with gcc 4.0?
>
> --
> Emilio Wuerges
> LAPS - Laboratorio de Automacao de Projeto de Sistemas
> UFSC - Universidade Federal de Santa Catarina
> Brasil
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT
> Join SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance to share y=
our
> opinions on IT & business topics through brief surveys - and earn cash
> http://www.techsay.com/default.php?page=3Djoin.php&p=3Dsourceforge&CID=3D=
DEVDEV
>
> _______________________________________________
> Opencxx-users mailing list
> Ope...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/opencxx-users
>
>
>

Hi Scott,

2006/11/16, Scott D. Fleming <sd...@ms...>:
>
> OpenC++ hard codes the name of the compiler "g++" into its source as a
> string. Before you compile OpenC++, you will need to find that string
> and replace it with the correct command name for your version. I can't
> recall if there are any other difficulties with getting this sort of
> setup to work, but there may very well be.

That helped me.

grep '"g++"' -r .
Did found the source files with g++ hardcoded and after that I changed them.

-- 
Emilio Wuerges
LAPS - Laboratorio de Automacao de Projeto de Sistemas
UFSC - Universidade Federal de Santa Catarina
Brasil

On Thu, 2006-11-16 at 16:57 -0500, Scott D. Fleming wrote:
> Hi Emilio,
> I've been unable to use OpenC++ with gcc 4.x. OpenC++'s parser barfs
> on some of the standard headers.

see 
from: Gilles J. Seguin
subject: "make check" fail on branch rel_2_9 with gcc 4.0.1 in C++
headers
                              Date: 
Thu, 20 Oct 2005 06:03:37 -0400

i am 4.1.1 and working

>  I do have it working with gcc 3.x.
> Although, I have hacked the parser a bit to get it to work, and the
> latest OpenC++ cvs snapshot may not have similar patches applied to
> it.

I can add contributed patches to branches rel_2_9

> You may want to install multiple versions of gcc on your system,
> having the latest/greatest as your default and using an older version
> with OpenC++. On Debian-based systems (e.g. Ubuntu), they offer
> different gcc version packages. For the older versions, the commands
> are appended with "-version"; for example, "gcc" becomes "gcc-3.3".
> When you build OpenC++ by hand, you can pass configure options that
> tell it to use the older version of gcc. There is a catch, though.
> OpenC++ hard codes the name of the compiler "g++" into its source as a
> string. Before you compile OpenC++, you will need to find that string
> and replace it with the correct command name for your version. I can't
> recall if there are any other difficulties with getting this sort of
> setup to work, but there may very well be.
> 
> Good luck!
> Cheers, Scott

Hi Gilles,

> > I've been unable to use OpenC++ with gcc 4.x. OpenC++'s parser barfs
> > on some of the standard headers.
>
> see
> from: Gilles J. Seguin
> subject: "make check" fail on branch rel_2_9 with gcc 4.0.1 in C++
> headers
>                               Date:
> Thu, 20 Oct 2005 06:03:37 -0400

I looked at the email exchange you cite above, and I see that it
describes the problem with gcc 4 that I encountered. However, I don't
see a solution described.

> i am 4.1.1 and working

What version of OpenC++ are you using? If it's the version in the CVS
repository, would you mind posting a new snapshot to the OpenC++
homepage?

Also, if you do add a new snapshot, you might also add an entry to the
news section of OpenC++ homepage. I think it would help direct new
users to the version that will give them the best results.

> >  I do have it working with gcc 3.x.
> > Although, I have hacked the parser a bit to get it to work, and the
> > latest OpenC++ cvs snapshot may not have similar patches applied to
> > it.
>
> I can add contributed patches to branches rel_2_9

If you have a version of OpenC++ that works with gcc 4.1.1, I suspect
my patches are no longer necessary. If I find it otherwise, I will let
you know.

Thanks, Scott