Build fix for ambiguity with gcc >= 14#866
Open
agmt wants to merge 1 commit intoHowardHinnant:masterfrom
Open
Conversation
Owner
|
I encourage clients to use |
offa
added a commit
to offa/influxdb-cxx
that referenced
this pull request
Mar 12, 2025
The date library is broken on GCC / Clang on this commit, thus PR866 (HowardHinnant/date#866) is applied.
offa
added a commit
to offa/influxdb-cxx
that referenced
this pull request
Mar 12, 2025
The date library is broken on GCC / Clang on this commit, thus PR866 (HowardHinnant/date#866) is applied.
jktjkt
added a commit
to CESNET/libyang-cpp
that referenced
this pull request
May 28, 2025
On GCC 14.2, this won't build for me: include/libyang-cpp/Time.hpp:117:34: error: no matching function for call to ‘parse(const char [21], std::chrono::time_point<std::chrono::_V2::system_clock, std::chrono::duration<long int, std::ratio<1, 1000000000> > >&)’ The error message is actually the same as in a proposed fix [1], and upstream maintainer has said that they actually recommend relying on the STL on this "new enough" platform. I'm very happy to oblige. We were discussing this last year (I51242fe2ec873fba5954c44e38e898d205a9e484), but at the time this was implemented the build failure was not known, AFAICT, so let's assume that the former use case for building with "new enough STL", but actually forcing HH-date, is no longer important. [1] HowardHinnant/date#866 Change-Id: Id4b0206e2a960686fb1d8e76134b9061d7545d81
Humblesaw
pushed a commit
to Humblesaw/libyang-cpp
that referenced
this pull request
Nov 24, 2025
On GCC 14.2, this won't build for me: include/libyang-cpp/Time.hpp:117:34: error: no matching function for call to ‘parse(const char [21], std::chrono::time_point<std::chrono::_V2::system_clock, std::chrono::duration<long int, std::ratio<1, 1000000000> > >&)’ The error message is actually the same as in a proposed fix [1], and upstream maintainer has said that they actually recommend relying on the STL on this "new enough" platform. I'm very happy to oblige. We were discussing this last year (I51242fe2ec873fba5954c44e38e898d205a9e484), but at the time this was implemented the build failure was not known, AFAICT, so let's assume that the former use case for building with "new enough STL", but actually forcing HH-date, is no longer important. [1] HowardHinnant/date#866 Change-Id: Id4b0206e2a960686fb1d8e76134b9061d7545d81
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Resolves building with gcc-14 (
-std=c++20):In attempt to build:
compiler reports a conflict of
date/date.hwithc++/14/bits/chrono_io.h:The issue has been introduced at f079e35
The patch is working on g++-11 and g++-14