recommended boost version?
ssteinbach opened this issue · 4 comments
Hi Guys,
I was wondering, is there a recommended version of boost for building the PyImath bindings? I'm trying to compile against boost 1.51.0 on mac os x (mountain lion). This is compiling on revision 2664764.
I'm seeing lots of build errors and assuming it has something to do with incompatible boost versions, but am not sure.
(pages like this):
/opt/local/include/boost/python/operators.hpp: In static member function 'static PyObject* boost::python::detail::operator_l<op_add>::apply<L, R>::execute(typename boost::python::detail::unwrap_wrapper_::type&, const typename boost::python::detail::unwrap_wrapper_::type&) [with L = PyImath::FixedArray2D, R = PyImath::FixedArray2D]':
/opt/local/include/boost/python/operators.hpp:152: instantiated from 'void boost::python::detail::operator_<id, L, R>::visit(ClassT&) const [with ClassT = boost::python::class_PyImath::FixedArray2D<int, boost::python::detail::not_specified, boost::python::detail::not_specified, boost::python::detail::not_specified>, boost::python::detail::operator_id id = op_add, L = boost::python::self_ns::self_t, R = boost::python::self_ns::self_t]'
/opt/local/include/boost/python/def_visitor.hpp:31: instantiated from 'static void boost::python::def_visitor_access::visit(const V&, classT&) [with V = boost::python::def_visitor<boost::python::detail::operator_<op_add, boost::python::self_ns::self_t, boost::python::self_ns::self_t> >, classT = boost::python::class_PyImath::FixedArray2D<int, boost::python::detail::not_specified, boost::python::detail::not_specified, boost::python::detail::not_specified>]'
/opt/local/include/boost/python/def_visitor.hpp:67: instantiated from 'void boost::python::def_visitor::visit(classT&) const [with classT = boost::python::class_PyImath::FixedArray2D<int, boost::python::detail::not_specified, boost::python::detail::not_specified, boost::python::detail::not_specified>, DerivedVisitor = boost::python::detail::operator_<op_add, boost::python::self_ns::self_t, boost::python::self_ns::self_t>]'
/opt/local/include/boost/python/class.hpp:226: instantiated from 'boost::python::class_<T, X1, X2, X3>& boost::python::class_<T, X1, X2, X3>::def(const boost::python::def_visitor&) [with Derived = boost::python::detail::operator_<op_add, boost::python::self_ns::self_t, boost::python::self_ns::self_t>, W = PyImath::FixedArray2D, X1 = boost::python::detail::not_specified, X2 = boost::python::detail::not_specified, X3 = boost::python::detail::not_specified]'
./PyImathFixedArray2D.h:651: instantiated from 'void PyImath::add_arithmetic_math_functions(boost::python::class_PyImath::FixedArray2D<T, boost::python::detail::not_specified, boost::python::detail::not_specified, boost::python::detail::not_specified>&) [with T = int]'
imathmodule.cpp:175: instantiated from here
/opt/local/include/boost/python/operators.hpp:212: error: no match for 'operator+' in 'l + r'
I may have missed it in the docs, sorry about that!
Hey,
Currently, boost 1.48 and below. We have some changes internally on the table that fix the build issues you are seeing ...
Cheers
Piotr
From: ssteinbach [notifications@github.com]
Sent: 24 October 2012 10:06
To: openexr/openexr
Subject: [openexr] reccomended boost version? (#41)
Hi Guys,
I was wondering, is there a recommended version of boost for building the PyImath bindings? I'm trying to compile against boost 1.51.0 on mac os x (mountain lion). This is compiling on revision 26647642664764.
I'm seeing lots of build errors and assuming it has something to do with incompatible boost versions, but am not sure.
(pages like this):
/opt/local/include/boost/python/operators.hpp: In static member function 'static PyObject* boost::python::detail::operator_l::apply::execute(typename boost::python::detail::unwrap_wrapper_::type&, const typename boost::python::detail::unwrap_wrapper_::type&) [with L = PyImath::FixedArray2D, R = PyImath::FixedArray2D]':
/opt/local/include/boost/python/operators.hpp:152: instantiated from 'void boost::python::detail::operator_::visit(ClassT&) const [with ClassT = boost::python::class_PyImath::FixedArray2D<int, boost::python::detail::not_specified, boost::python::detail::not_specified, boost::python::detail::not_specified>, boost::python::detail::operator_id id = op_add, L = boost::python::self_ns::self_t, R = boost::python::self_ns::self_t]'
/opt/local/include/boost/python/def_visitor.hpp:31: instantiated from 'static void boost::python::def_visitor_access::visit(const V&, classT&) [with V = boost::python::def_visitor >, classT = boost::python::class_PyImath::FixedArray2D<int, boost::python::detail::not_specified, boost::python::detail::not_specified, boost::python::detail::not_specified>]'
/opt/local/include/boost/python/def_visitor.hpp:67: instantiated from 'void boost::python::def_visitor::visit(classT&) const [with classT = boost::python::class_PyImath::FixedArray2D<int, boost::python::detail::not_specified, boost::python::detail::not_specified, boost::python::detail::not_specified>, DerivedVisitor = boost::python::detail::operator_]'
/opt/local/include/boost/python/class.hpp:226: instantiated from 'boost::python::class_& boost::python::class_::def(const boost::python::def_visitor&) [with Derived = boost::python::detail::operator_, W = PyImath::FixedArray2D, X1 = boost::python::detail::not_specified, X2 = boost::python::detail::not_specified, X3 = boost::python::detail::not_specified]'
./PyImathFixedArray2D.h:651: instantiated from 'void PyImath::add_arithmetic_math_functions(boost::python::class_PyImath::FixedArray2D<T, boost::python::detail::not_specified, boost::python::detail::not_specified, boost::python::detail::not_specified>&) [with T = int]'
imathmodule.cpp:175: instantiated from here
/opt/local/include/boost/python/operators.hpp:212: error: no match for 'operator+' in 'l + r'
I may have missed it in the docs, sorry about that!
—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHubhttps://github.com//issues/41.
Cool, Thanks Piotr! I figured it was something like that. I'll snag boost 1.48 for now.
cheers,
-Stephan.
Does a modern boost work now?
soooo.... does it work yet?