Latest version of xcode Command Line tools breaks sparsehash.

[GoogleCodeExporter]

What steps will reproduce the problem?
1. Compile on Mac OS X Maverick with XCode Command Line Tools March 2014

What is the expected output? What do you see instead?

I was expected correct compilation

I have attached the log.

What version of the product are you using? On what operating system?

Latest SVN (116).
Mac OS X 10.9.2
Compiler: XCode Command Line Tools March 2014

Please provide any additional information below.

Original issue reported on code.google.com by laurent....@gmail.com on 24 Mar 2014 at 5:52

Attachments:

• error.log

[GoogleCodeExporter]

I tried "make check" on sparsehash on a Mac with the latest xcode. It didn't 
work. The attached patch was able to fix 3 warnings and, more seriously, a type 
incompatibility.

I'm not ready to commit the patch yet (though I suspect it would be fine), and 
it may take me a week or two to get to it. But, the patch is here if you want 
to try it.

Original comment by gp...@google.com on 26 Mar 2014 at 12:17

• Changed state: Started

Attachments:

• issue-99-patch

[GoogleCodeExporter]

I now see that the patch mentioned in issue 100 is pretty much the same thing. 
Thanks Meno!

Original comment by gp...@google.com on 26 Mar 2014 at 12:21

[GoogleCodeExporter]

Issue 100 has been merged into this issue.

Original comment by gp...@google.com on 26 Mar 2014 at 12:21

[GoogleCodeExporter]

Is the fix going to be merged to master?

Original comment by ivan.ver...@gmail.com on 16 Apr 2014 at 4:15

[GoogleCodeExporter]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I suspect the root cause was that 
sparse_hashtable_iterator::st_iterator, 
sparse_hashtable_const_iterator::st_iterator, and 
sparse_hashtable_destructive_iterator::st_iterator were not typedef-ef 
correctly. So I propose the following patch for the type incompatibility issue 
instead.

Original comment by qiu...@gmail.com on 19 Apr 2014 at 10:22

Attachments:

• allocator.patch

[GoogleCodeExporter]

there are a number of warning in the unit tests after applying the patch, but 
otherwise is excellent

Original comment by cristeab on 17 May 2014 at 6:33