remove explicit make_pair template arguments#38
remove explicit make_pair template arguments#38wookietreiber wants to merge 1 commit intoDaehwanKimLab:masterfrom
Conversation
wookietreiber
commented
Jun 2, 2016
- this causes compilation failures using gcc 6.1.1, e.g.:
- these failures are possibly related to a newer default c++ standard that is used with the new gcc
|
@wookietreiber: I am having hard time running unit test , would appreciate if you can let me know which version with what changes should I use in order to get the unit test up and running? perhaps IDE name and version which is suitable for CppUnit. |
|
@mbparsa What unit test? I'm not a tophat dev, sorry, I don't know what you're talking about. |
|
@wookietreiber : I thought you might be able to help, since I can't get any response from the main developers. The unit test inside tests folder. I am trying to import the repository into NetBeans +UnitTest |
|
I have just worked with the release tarballs from here. These don't include tests. |
|
@wookietreiber ok, thanks |
|
Using std::make_pair with explicit template arguments is self-defeating - the only reason you would use make_pair is to actually have argument type deduction (http://www.advogato.org/person/redi/diary.html?start=239 and https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43785). |
|
@SoapGentoo Yes, indeed. Thus, please merge :) |
|
@wookietreiber I would love to 😄 , but I'm not a maintainer, just pitching in that we're having the same problem in Gentoo. |
* a patch exists: DaehwanKimLab/tophat#38 but might have unexpected side effects
* Add TopHat package release 2.1.1 * Merge changes from cornalin * TopHat package release 2.1.2 * tophat conflicts with gcc@6: (#234) * a patch exists: DaehwanKimLab/tophat#38 but might have unexpected side effects
* Add TopHat package release 2.1.1 * Merge changes from cornalin * TopHat package release 2.1.2 * tophat conflicts with gcc@6: (#234) * a patch exists: DaehwanKimLab/tophat#38 but might have unexpected side effects
- this causes compilation failures using gcc 6.1.1 - these failures are possibly related to a newer default c++ standard that is used with the new gcc
907fd18 to
8441168
Compare