{"action":"created","issue":{"url":"https://api.github.com/repos/geodynamics/aspect/issues/668","labels_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/geodynamics/aspect/issues/668/labels{/name}","comments_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/geodynamics/aspect/issues/668/comments","events_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/geodynamics/aspect/issues/668/events","html_url":"https://github.com/geodynamics/aspect/pull/668","id":117003525,"number":668,"title":"Fix warnings gcc 51","user":{"login":"gassmoeller","id":7582930,"avatar_url":"https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/u/7582930?v=3","gravatar_id":"","url":"https://api.github.com/users/gassmoeller","html_url":"https://github.com/gassmoeller","followers_url":"https://api.github.com/users/gassmoeller/followers","following_url":"https://api.github.com/users/gassmoeller/following{/other_user}","gists_url":"https://api.github.com/users/gassmoeller/gists{/gist_id}","starred_url":"https://api.github.com/users/gassmoeller/starred{/owner}{/repo}","subscriptions_url":"https://api.github.com/users/gassmoeller/subscriptions","organizations_url":"https://api.github.com/users/gassmoeller/orgs","repos_url":"https://api.github.com/users/gassmoeller/repos","events_url":"https://api.github.com/users/gassmoeller/events{/privacy}","received_events_url":"https://api.github.com/users/gassmoeller/received_events","type":"User","site_admin":false},"labels":[],"state":"open","locked":false,"assignee":null,"milestone":null,"comments":13,"created_at":"2015-11-15T16:53:49Z","updated_at":"2015-11-16T20:48:41Z","closed_at":null,"pull_request":{"url":"https://api.github.com/repos/geodynamics/aspect/pulls/668","html_url":"https://github.com/geodynamics/aspect/pull/668","diff_url":"https://github.com/geodynamics/aspect/pull/668.diff","patch_url":"https://github.com/geodynamics/aspect/pull/668.patch"},"body":"While recompiling aspect with gcc5.1 (our cluster switched its default compilers) I got a lot of deprecation warnings for the use of `auto_ptr`. Since it will be removed in C++17, maybe we can replace it by `unique_ptr` anyway?\r\n\r\nAlso I got hundreds of warnings for including `deal.II/base/multithread_info.h:64` in `aspect/global.h` that I did not get before (e.g. gcc 4.8 did not output them). Is this an issue in deal.II, or do we have to live with that until this line gets removed (after the release of deal.II 8.4?)?"},"comment":{"url":"https://api.github.com/repos/geodynamics/aspect/issues/comments/157164731","html_url":"https://github.com/geodynamics/aspect/pull/668#issuecomment-157164731","issue_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/geodynamics/aspect/issues/668","id":157164731,"user":{"login":"gassmoeller","id":7582930,"avatar_url":"https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/u/7582930?v=3","gravatar_id":"","url":"https://api.github.com/users/gassmoeller","html_url":"https://github.com/gassmoeller","followers_url":"https://api.github.com/users/gassmoeller/followers","following_url":"https://api.github.com/users/gassmoeller/following{/other_user}","gists_url":"https://api.github.com/users/gassmoeller/gists{/gist_id}","starred_url":"https://api.github.com/users/gassmoeller/starred{/owner}{/repo}","subscriptions_url":"https://api.github.com/users/gassmoeller/subscriptions","organizations_url":"https://api.github.com/users/gassmoeller/orgs","repos_url":"https://api.github.com/users/gassmoeller/repos","events_url":"https://api.github.com/users/gassmoeller/events{/privacy}","received_events_url":"https://api.github.com/users/gassmoeller/received_events","type":"User","site_admin":false},"created_at":"2015-11-16T20:48:41Z","updated_at":"2015-11-16T20:48:41Z","body":"@jperryhouts: I am not sure, we recommend all users to start with the debug version (it is also the default setting), to see if we hit any assertions. So disabling it for the release version will not help many users. But I agree we should try to have as few useless warnings around as possible, they are particularly annoying when I am a new user, and try to install aspect, and can not find the error, because half of the warnings I get are harmless. Therefore my suggestion with the shared pointers, then we would remove all warnings, and could switch to unique_pointers later on.\r\n\r\n@bangerth: I started writing a patch for multithread_info, but must admit, I do not get how this class is supposed to work (maybe @tjhei knows more?). There is the public member variable n_cpus, which is deprecated, and replaced by the function n_cores(), which simply returns the value of n_cpus. So in order to keep the function working, I would need to make n_cpus private and remove the deprecation. But there is no place where n_cpus is set (apparently it was set from the outside before?), so making it private would make it completely useless. Additionally, there is this private static member function get_n_cpus(), which is implemented, but private and nowhere called. Should I change n_cores() to return the return value of get_n_cpus(), which is ignored so far? Or am I missing something about how private members of static classes work?"}}