8000 Building CGNS tools with Intel LLVM compilers fails · Issue #749 · CGNS/CGNS · GitHub
[go: up one dir, main page]
More Web Proxy on the site http://driver.im/
Skip to content

Building CGNS to 8000 ols with Intel LLVM compilers fails #749

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Jump to bottom
Open
mennodeij opened this issue Jan 24, 2024 · 1 comment
Open

Building CGNS tools with Intel LLVM compilers fails #749

mennodeij opened this issue Jan 24, 2024 · 1 comment

Comments

@mennodeij
Copy link
Contributor
mennodeij commented Jan 24, 2024 •
edited
Loading

We're preparing for changing from the "Classic" Intel compilers to the LLVM-based ones. These are in the oneAPI toolkit:
CC=icx CXX=icpx FC=ifx F90=ifx

When the build is configured with CMake and -DCGNS_BUILD_CGNSTOOLS=ON (default), there are many build warnings like this:
warning: a function definition without a prototype is deprecated in all versions of C and is not supported in C2x [-Wdeprecated-non-prototype]

and build errors:

src/cgnstools/tkogl/tkogl.c:602:8: error: call to undeclared function 'TkWmAddToColormapWindows'; ISO C99 and later do not support implicit function declarations [-Wimplicit-function-declaration]
       TkWmAddToColormapWindows(tkwin);

If CGNS_BUILD_CGNSTOOLS=OFF is chosen, the build completes successfully without any warnings or errors.

It would be nice if this new Intel LLVM compiler was supported for the CGNS tools as well.
@MicK7 MicK7 mentioned this issue Mar 3, 2024
Merged
@brtnfld
Copy link
Member
brtnfld commented Mar 5, 2024

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

No branches or pull requests
2 participants
@mennodeij @brtnfld
0