RE: [pooma-dev] Supported Compilers?

[Julian C. Cummings]

Jim,

 

I addressed this issue for the SGI CC compiler some time ago by

inserting into the src/arch/SGI area substitutes for the missing

standard header files that include the old-style .h headers and then

inject the stuff from the C standard library into the std namespace.

So in fact, you should now be able to use the standard header file

names and the std:: qualifier with C library functions under the SGI

CC compiler.  I thought I updated the src/arch/Intel area in a similar

way, but I may have overlooked some things.

 

In any event, there is a prescription for fixing this problem so that

the standard names can be used.  I was going to respond to your

recent update of the FileSetWriter.h file and request that you try

including <cstring> instead of <string.h> and use std::memset

instead of memset.  This should work under SGI CC using the

substitute <cstring> header in src/arch/SGI.  If there is something

missing or if we need a similar header for src/arch/Intel, let's fix the

problem there and try to use standard include files and syntax in

all the Pooma header files.  It should be safe to do so at this point.

 

Julian C.

 

-----Original Message-----
From: James Crotinger [mailto:address@hidden
Sent: Friday, September 28, 2001 8:57 AM
To: 'address@hidden'; address@hidden
Subject: RE: [pooma-dev] Supported Compilers?

We do use compilers that don't put C functions in std::. I think both SGI CC and VC++ have .h-less C headers, but don't put the C functions in std::. The .h-less C header files are standard conforming and at least prior to the 2.4 project our rule was to use these since they were more portable.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jeffrey Oldham [mailto:address@hidden]
> Sent: Friday, September 28, 2001 8:23 AM
> To: address@hidden
> Subject: [pooma-dev] Supported Compilers?
>
>
>
>       For Pooma, what compilers are we supporting?  In particular,
> are we supporting any compilers did not recognize the standard
> '.h'-less header filenames?
>
>        Right now, the code uses both deprecated and standard header
> filenames.
>
> Thanks,
> Jeffrey D. Oldham
> address@hidden
>